PDA

View Full Version : Some straight talk on the D-Line


Pages : [1] 2

BroncoBuff
06-27-2009, 10:49 AM
I have faith in Mike Nolan, I really do.

But any reasonable, objective appraisal of our current D-would be that it's a real mess. Our three starters in the 3-4 alignment:

Ryan McBean - has played in only one game ever, in 2007
Ron Fields has just 9 career starts ... all in 2006. ONE career sack in 4 seasons.
Kenny Peterson (although I've been his biggest supporter on the board), just 1 start in six seasons
That is not a confidence-inspiring trio, not by a long shot. I daresay Ekuban is better than any of the three (though albeit a graybeard now). "The market" has spoken on these three ... they're all castoffs.

And not a word outta Dove Valley this offseason about Marcus Thomas or Carlton Powell? That seems strange ... those three starters ahead of them ... is that a Shanahan player purge of some kind ???

meangene
06-27-2009, 10:57 AM
The thing all three have in common is they have played in a 3-4 so you would expect them to be ahead of guys like Thomas and Powell. Give it time to sort itself out - we have a terrific DL coach and all those guys are young with the exception of Peterson. Patience, my friend.

BroncoBuff
06-27-2009, 10:59 AM
Wow gene ... a calm, thoughtful, logical post. What's up with that?

BroncoBuff
06-27-2009, 11:02 AM
I'm concerned we're going into the season weak, weak, weak there (yet again).

We drafted just one D-lineman - and that guy is a LB now. The standard response from pro-Josh guys is that there was a dearth of talent in the draft ... but the facts disagree:

7 d-linemen drafted in Round 1
7 d-linemen drafted in Round 2
7 d-linemen drafted in Round 3
10 d-linemen drafted in Round 4


Obviously there were plenty of D-linemen out there ... in fact, 31 drafted in the first 135 picks shows D-linemen were actually OVER-represented in this draft.

TheReverend
06-27-2009, 11:03 AM
Strong thread, Buff.

I'm 110% shocked you made it.

:)

BroncoBuff
06-27-2009, 11:08 AM
Strong thread, Buff.

I'm 110% shocked you made it.

:)

Don't you have a Lido Deck to get to or something? :~ohyah!:

watermock
06-27-2009, 11:09 AM
But the index card only had room for "team" players.

We "got the guys we wanted", so what's the big deal, even if trading a top 5 in next draft and trading up into the second round for a blocking TE when we have 1 paid 10M.

And if Biilycheat didn't like the DT's, why did he find 3 of them, including Brace?

The "spin" surounding McBeavis has been incredible. We don't even know how much spygate influenced their early 21st century success, but his coordinators have all failed.

We'll see if we can hold blocks long enough for Moreno to stroll thru. I hope so or it's going to be a long year.

ZONA
06-27-2009, 11:09 AM
I'm concerned we're going into the season weak, weak, weak there (yet again).

We drafted just one D-lineman - and that guy is a LB now. The standard response from pro-Josh guys is that there was a dearth of talent in the draft ... but the facts disagree:

7 d-linemen drafted in Round 1
7 d-linemen drafted in Round 2
7 d-linemen drafted in Round 3
10 d-linemen drafted in Round 4


Obviously there were plenty of AVERAGE D-linemen out there ... in fact, 31 drafted in the first 135 picks shows D-linemen were actually OVER-represented in this draft.

Fixed - aside from the first 5 or 6 guys, nobody was knocking McD's socks off I guess. Why draft crappy linemen just to draft them? Have we learned anything from Shanny in that regard? Obviously there wasn't anybody in the draft from the 2nd on that Nolan and McD felt was better then the guys we have, and our guys are all young so their upside would be the same as a new pick essentially.

gyldenlove
06-27-2009, 11:10 AM
The thing all three have in common is they have played in a 3-4 so you would expect them to be ahead of guys like Thomas and Powell. Give it time to sort itself out - we have a terrific DL coach and all those guys are young with the exception of Peterson. Patience, my friend.

When did Peterson play 3-4?

Mcbean is a guy who was known to be very raw when he came out, but with a lot of physical ability and athleticism. I am not surprised he has taken a while to find a home. He is easily the DL player I am most excited about.

gyldenlove
06-27-2009, 11:11 AM
Fixed - aside from the first 5 or 6 guys, nobody was knocking McD's socks off I guess. Why draft crappy linemen just to draft them? Have we learned anything from Shanny in that regard?

Why assume that Mcdaniels knows how to draft defensive linemen? It could just be he is no good at it, clearly one of them knocked Belichicks socks off, and one went to Pittsburgh, so there were at least some good-uns.

BroncoBuff
06-27-2009, 11:13 AM
Mcbean is a guy who was known to be very raw when he came out, but with a lot of physical ability and athleticism. I am not surprised he has taken a while to find a home. He is easily the DL player I am most excited about.

I suppose my mind is open on McBean ... but he was outta the league in '08 you know.

SoCalBronco
06-27-2009, 11:13 AM
I have faith in Mike Nolan, I really do.

But any reasonable, objective appraisal of our current D-would be that it's a real mess. Our three starters in the 3-4 alignment:

Ryan McBean - has played in only one game ever, in 2007
Ron Fields has just 9 career starts ... all in 2006. ONE career sack in 4 seasons.
Kenny Peterson (although I've been his biggest supporter on the board), just 1 start in six seasons
That is not a confidence-inspiring trio, not by a long shot. I daresay Ekuban is better than any of the three (though albeit a graybeard now). "The market" has spoken on these three ... they're all castoffs.

And not a word outta Dove Valley this offseason about Marcus Thomas or Carlton Powell? That seems strange ... those three starters ahead of them ... is that a Shanahan player purge of some kind ???

It is problematic that we've got guys like Peterson and McBean ahead of more talented players like Marcus Thomas merely because they fit the 3-4 better.

The system is supposed to fit the better players, not vice versa.

Mediator12
06-27-2009, 11:18 AM
Fixed - aside from the first 5 or 6 guys, nobody was knocking McD's socks off I guess. Why draft crappy linemen just to draft them? Have we learned anything from Shanny in that regard? Obviously there wasn't anybody in the draft from the 2nd on that Nolan and McD felt was better then the guys we have, and our guys are all young so their upside would be the same as a new pick essentially.

This was the weakest top talent draft in recent memory. Only one stud Defensive player in Aaron Curry and a whole bunch of late first, early second defensive players in most drafts. The top CB was a tweener that is not a lock to even be a CB at the next level, there were no consensus Stud LB's, the safeties were weak as hell, and DL are still a very premium position in the NFL.

While Raw numbers tell how many were taken, it fails to match the quality of 3 years ago when there were some real DL to be had. This was real weak draft at the top, but very deep in solid starter type players or just good prospects. There were chances to get top DL in the past, but that has been another story altogether.

Mediator12
06-27-2009, 11:21 AM
Why assume that Mcdaniels knows how to draft defensive linemen? It could just be he is no good at it, clearly one of them knocked Belichicks socks off, and one went to Pittsburgh, so there were at least some good-uns.

Or, both those teams starters are due to be FA's in the uncapped year ahead and the backups they have are uninspiring to them. Brace is 2 year to impact type of player on the low side and Ziggy Hood is a possible 5 technique guy due to his high motor and The Average starting age of their DL is 30+ now.

~Crash~
06-27-2009, 11:22 AM
It is problematic that we've got guys like Peterson and McBean ahead of more talented players like Marcus Thomas merely because they fit the 3-4 better.

The system is supposed to fit the better players, not vice versa.

Marcus Thomas will start he fits one gap really well ! he has the burst that will get him 8 to 12 sacks this season even at NT .

Mediator12
06-27-2009, 11:34 AM
Marcus Thomas will start he fits one gap really well ! he has the burst that will get him 8 to 12 sacks this season even at NT .

Seriously, the guy has zero sacks in 32 games, including 21 starts, yet he is due to break out with 8 to 12 sacks playing NT in 3-4 where most NT's are lucky to get 3 sacks a season?

Whew, what are you taking today ;D

TheReverend
06-27-2009, 11:36 AM
Or, both those teams starters are due to be FA's in the uncapped year ahead and the backups they have are uninspiring to them. Brace is 2 year to impact type of player on the low side and Ziggy Hood is a possible 5 technique guy due to his high motor and The Average starting age of their DL is 30+ now.

And that absolves Denver how?

The sheer fact that New England thinks Brace can replace Wilfork is convincing enough that he was worth taking over a nickel.

And what's wrong with drafting a 5 tech in the first round? A dominant 3-4 DE makes everyone else look a lot better. Richard Seymour, Darnell Dockett, the mexican guy that popped for roids precombine in SD.

montrose
06-27-2009, 11:37 AM
The system is supposed to fit the better players, not vice versa.

That doesn't appear to be the philosophy with the new regime. Rightfully or wrongfully, they're going to force players to play the type of scheme they want and I expect that after this pre-determined rebuilding season - we'll see even more Shanahan-holdovers ousted who can't do what the Broncos want them too.

Per who is playing with the 1st unit now during OTAs, everytime McDaniels has discussed the position he's stressed how you cannot fully evaluate the position until full-contact begins during camp. Because it would appear that McDaniels wants to take the team in a physical-direction, we may see an entirely different starting three. It could be Clemons, or Thomas, or Fields, or Powell. While it certainly appears to me to be a lack of major talent on the unit, I do find it possible that McDaniels may be evaluating them with different priorities than the previous regime.

What I do know is that short of vastly overpaying for a guy like Canty or Olshansky (which would be stupid for a rebuilding team, IMO), there weren't too many options to add talent. We could've traded up for B.J. Raji - however it is noteworthy that he is playing DE and not NT for the Packers because he's not a natural NT just as Mediator and Rev were stressing prior to the draft. I suppose we could've went for Ron Brace with the Alphonso Smith pick, but it is possible they simply didn't see enough in him to warrant that value despite a need at the position (a case again of BPA).

I can't wait for camp, the competition across the board is going to be so fun to watch.

BroncoBuff
06-27-2009, 11:42 AM
Seriously, the guy has zero sacks in 32 games, including 21 starts, yet he is due to break out with 8 to 12 sacks playing NT in 3-4 where most NT's are lucky to get 3 sacks a season?

Whew, what are you taking today ;D

I'm glad you like Brace med ... I like Alphonso, even think he'll be starting by mid-season (I have very little confidence in Goodman), but when they announced the Seahawks trade I was sure the pick was gonna be Ron Brace. I hope he doesn't haunt us later.

And re: Marcus Thomas ... I agree he won't get that many sacks, but he is an athletic, mobile guy, with good size and decent push. Isn't that the prototype-Justin Bannan-like 3-4 DE? I dunno why we're trying to pack pounds on him for NT? Seems to me Powell is much better suited there. ???

TexanBob
06-27-2009, 11:50 AM
Since everything wrong was due to Slowik or Shanahan or possibly the crybaby quarterback, it should be totally fixed now, right? I mean that's all I heard for months.

gyldenlove
06-27-2009, 11:51 AM
Or, both those teams starters are due to be FA's in the uncapped year ahead and the backups they have are uninspiring to them. Brace is 2 year to impact type of player on the low side and Ziggy Hood is a possible 5 technique guy due to his high motor and The Average starting age of their DL is 30+ now.

Clearly both those teams are better off at DL in the short and long term than us as things stand right now. Both teams have dominant defenses, taking a page out of their playbook and player evaluations might not be a bad thing. I have a hard time thinking of teams running the 3-4 that I would rather emulate than the Patriots and Steelers.

Mediator12
06-27-2009, 11:58 AM
And that absolves Denver how?

The sheer fact that New England thinks Brace can replace Wilfork is convincing enough that he was worth taking over a nickel.

And what's wrong with drafting a 5 tech in the first round? A dominant 3-4 DE makes everyone else look a lot better. Richard Seymour, Darnell Dockett, the mexican guy that popped for roids precombine in SD.

It does not absolve DEN in the least, but just because NE and PIT need to get bodies for the future on their DL does not make these guys great players. Both of those teams have also struck out on DL they have drafted, just like every other team. I personally do not think Brace is ever going to be mentally tough enough to play for NE and take the abuse Wilfork gets every game. I just think they will draft anohter young DL to replace one of the 3 starters they do not keep to go with Brace who might end up at DE there as well.

There is nothing wrong with drafting a 5 technique DE in the first round at all. But Hood is not a dominate player at 5 Tech in that system to me. He is a penetrator, but he does not hold the POA worth a crap if he fails to get penetration or the jump off the snap. I would rather have him as a pure 3 tech in one gap scheme, versus a 5 tech in a zone blitz scheme.

~Crash~
06-27-2009, 12:00 PM
Seriously, the guy has zero sacks in 32 games, including 21 starts, yet he is due to break out with 8 to 12 sacks playing NT in 3-4 where most NT's are lucky to get 3 sacks a season?

Whew, what are you taking today ;D

he was stuck in 2 gap he never fit that system

Mediator12
06-27-2009, 12:01 PM
Since everything wrong was due to Slowik or Shanahan or possibly the crybaby quarterback, it should be totally fixed now, right? I mean that's all I heard for months.

You must have skipped the parts where everyone has said the front 4 has sucked since 2003. That has only been here since 2003 :welcome:

Of course, adding Slowik and Shanahan's defensive GM calls never improved any of that either ;D

~Crash~
06-27-2009, 12:04 PM
mark this post down I hate most moves this season but one gap I do not mind . I hate read and react .two gap sucks

Mediator12
06-27-2009, 12:05 PM
he was stuck in 2 gap he never fit that system

You do realize that NT in a 3-4 is a 2 gap position right ??? And while They will play the one gap version of the 3-4, the NT will almost always assume a double team at least at the outset negating any speed penetration almost completely?

Plus, DEN did not play a 2 gap in the pure since, they played run read defense under Bates, and all kinds of more worthless stuff under Slowik. To Quote Sam Adams, "We don't play no 2 gap system in DEN LOL "

24champ
06-27-2009, 12:07 PM
J'vonne Parker- DT

Parker has appeared in 11 career regular-season games (0 starts), totaling six tackles (4 solo) and one fumble recovery.

Mattias Askew- DT

2008: Askew has spent the 2008 season out of football since being released by Washington at the end of training camp.
2007: Askew has spent the season out of football after being released by Washington on Sept. 2.

Ryan McBean-
A second-year defensive end who joined Denver’s practice squad on Sept. 1. Spent most of his rookie season on Pittsburgh’s practice squad, seeing time in the regular-season finale at Bal. (12/30) after being declared inactive for two contests.

AWESOME PICKUPS BY THE FO!!!!

[/Kool-aid]

meangene
06-27-2009, 12:10 PM
When did Peterson play 3-4?

Mcbean is a guy who was known to be very raw when he came out, but with a lot of physical ability and athleticism. I am not surprised he has taken a while to find a home. He is easily the DL player I am most excited about.

I'm pretty sure Peterson played some 3-4 in Green Bay, but I agree with you on McBean. He seemed to come out of nowhere during the OTA's and is a real young guy with alot of athletic ability. We have several talented young guys who could develop into players up front. Who would of though Crowder would be pushing Doom at OLB?

DenverBrit
06-27-2009, 12:10 PM
I have faith in Mike Nolan, I really do.


But you don't have faith in his ability to judge talent?
If there were any DL available and worth drafting, don't you think the Broncos would have taken them?
I doubt anyone in the Broncos organization thinks that the D can be fixed in less than 2-3 years.

meangene
06-27-2009, 12:11 PM
Wow gene ... a calm, thoughtful, logical post. What's up with that?

I see it didn't help your panic mode any! Ha!

DBroncos4life
06-27-2009, 12:12 PM
I'm glad you like Brace med ... I like Alphonso, even think he'll be starting by mid-season (I have very little confidence in Goodman), but when they announced the Seahawks trade I was sure the pick was gonna be Ron Brace. I hope he doesn't haunt us later.

And re: Marcus Thomas ... I agree he won't get that many sacks, but he is an athletic, mobile guy, with good size and decent push. Isn't that the prototype-Justin Bannan-like 3-4 DE? I dunno why we're trying to pack pounds on him for NT? Seems to me Powell is much better suited there. ???

I think he could be ok but he has never really played well other then last year. Bly will out play him in San Fran.

~Crash~
06-27-2009, 12:15 PM
You do realize that NT in a 3-4 is a 2 gap position right ??? And while They will play the one gap version of the 3-4, the NT will almost always assume a double team at least at the outset negating any speed penetration almost completely?

Plus, DEN did not play a 2 gap in the pure since, they played run read defense under Bates, and all kinds of more worthless stuff under Slowik. To Quote Sam Adams, "We don't play no 2 gap system in DEN LOL "

If you insist meat head but I sure seen all our linemen taking on double teams .

Florida_Bronco
06-27-2009, 12:17 PM
J'vonne Parker- DT

Parker has appeared in 11 career regular-season games (0 starts), totaling six tackles (4 solo) and one fumble recovery.

Mattias Askew- DT

2008: Askew has spent the 2008 season out of football since being released by Washington at the end of training camp.
2007: Askew has spent the season out of football after being released by Washington on Sept. 2.

Ryan McBean-
A second-year defensive end who joined Denver’s practice squad on Sept. 1. Spent most of his rookie season on Pittsburgh’s practice squad, seeing time in the regular-season finale at Bal. (12/30) after being declared inactive for two contests.

AWESOME PICKUPS BY THE FO!!!!

[/Kool-aid]

Alright, why don't you tell me who they should have picked up.

meangene
06-27-2009, 12:18 PM
And re: Marcus Thomas ... I agree he won't get that many sacks, but he is an athletic, mobile guy, with good size and decent push. Isn't that the prototype-Justin Bannan-like 3-4 DE? I dunno why we're trying to pack pounds on him for NT? Seems to me Powell is much better suited there. ???

I think Thomas is there now because Powell and Baker are both basically rookies and will have to earn their way into the rotation. Once either one shows enough I think you will see Thomas at DE. I think Nolan is more worried about finding a couple NT's out of this group right now.

meangene
06-27-2009, 12:25 PM
Clearly both those teams are better off at DL in the short and long term than us as things stand right now. Both teams have dominant defenses, taking a page out of their playbook and player evaluations might not be a bad thing. I have a hard time thinking of teams running the 3-4 that I would rather emulate than the Patriots and Steelers.

They also historically stick to the best player available draft philosophy. That is what we did in this draft - we stuck to our board and took the BPA. Not to say there were not some ok DL available, just that we had other players rated higher. In the long run, that system will reap more rewards and is exactly what teams like Pittsburgh and New England do.

DBroncos4life
06-27-2009, 12:41 PM
Alright, why don't you tell me who they should have picked up.

Well there was a more then a couple players out there that played well in a 3-4 to be had this offseason. Holliday is still out there and we are collecting WRs to do nothing more then take up space for practice. Pick up a guy that we know will stick on the active roster or a guy that we know isn't. Tough choice lets go with the former Pat. :thumbs:

24champ
06-27-2009, 12:42 PM
Alright, why don't you tell me who they should have picked up.

Bob's mom. She would have been an improvement over these jokers.

Florida_Bronco
06-27-2009, 12:49 PM
Well there was a more then a couple players out there that played well in a 3-4 to be had this offseason. Holliday is still out there and we are collecting WRs to do nothing more then take up space for practice. Pick up a guy that we know will stick on the active roster or a guy that we know isn't. Tough choice lets go with the former Pat. :thumbs:

Holliday was still asking too much money the last I heard.

DBroncos4life
06-27-2009, 12:51 PM
Holliday was still asking too much money the last I heard.

He was talking on sirus radio yesterday and he didn't say anything about money. He said that he had one maybe two years left and he wants a ring.

cutthemdown
06-27-2009, 12:54 PM
I really think Peterson a good player. I never understood why he didn't play more. He actually did some things which engleberger never did. IMO Shanny and his d coord just loved motor and quickness over size. Peterson a little bigger and I think he will really do well at end in this defense.

Thomas I think is a pure 4-3 DT and won't be doing well in denver in a 3-4

Mcbean sort of curious about but like said already dude just hasn't played.

Fields IMO is a journeyman type who will play decent for us at NT but nothing that makes you not want a better NT.

BroncoBuff
06-27-2009, 01:05 PM
He was talking on sirus radio yesterday and he didn't say anything about money. He said that he had one maybe two years left and he wants a ring.

Vonnie and Grady Jackson and other similar FAs were such graybeards, seems Nolan and McD don't wanna go that route.

It's gonna be a rough '09 I think.

footstepsfrom#27
06-27-2009, 01:06 PM
It is problematic that we've got guys like Peterson and McBean ahead of more talented players like Marcus Thomas merely because they fit the 3-4 better.

The system is supposed to fit the better players, not vice versa.
I don't expect these guys to wind up starting. They're probably there now since they know the 3-4 system better but there's no way Kenny Peterson is a better player than Thomas and my money is on Carlton Powell eventually emerging as a starter somewhere on this line.

Paladin
06-27-2009, 01:28 PM
I'm concerned we're going into the season weak, weak, weak there (yet again).

We drafted just one D-lineman - and that guy is a LB now. The standard response from pro-Josh guys is that there was a dearth of talent in the draft ... but the facts disagree:

7 d-linemen drafted in Round 1
7 d-linemen drafted in Round 2
7 d-linemen drafted in Round 3
10 d-linemen drafted in Round 4


Obviously there were plenty of average D-linemen out there ... in fact, 31 drafted in the first 135 picks shows D-linemen were actually OVER-represented in this draft.

And I am sure that Nolan knew who they were and passed. Honestly, if the players missed the urinal, many here would blame McD. Your idea of what is needed on the DL may just not be congruent with those of Nolan and the Assistant Coaches. Before you slash your wrists, why not wait until the preseason to see how they might pan out. Plenty of time to slit them then. Don't need them to be all-pros there, just help stop the run and get the QB thinking a bi......

footstepsfrom#27
06-27-2009, 02:15 PM
And I am sure that Nolan knew who they were and passed. Honestly, if the players missed the urinal, many here would blame McD. Your idea of what is needed on the DL may just not be congruent with those of Nolan and the Assistant Coaches. Before you slash your wrists, why not wait until the preseason to see how they might pan out. Plenty of time to slit them then. Don't need them to be all-pros there, just help stop the run and get the QB thinking a bi......
His point was well taken...31 of 128...24% of the picks were D-line in the first 4 rounds. That's significant enough to warrant attention and question the notion that the draft was bereft of talent at that position.

oubronco
06-27-2009, 02:38 PM
But you don't have faith in his ability to judge talent?
If there were any DL available and worth drafting, don't you think the Broncos would have taken them?I doubt anyone in the Broncos organization thinks that the D can be fixed in less than 2-3 years.

No they needed another blocking TE and a 5-9 nickel back

although I don't like what the FO has and is doing this offseason I'm hoping for the best :approve:

Tombstone RJ
06-27-2009, 02:46 PM
People need to remember that this defense is still gonna play alot of 4-3 and that the strength of this unit is probably in the LBers. Nolan will sift through the players and find the best fit along the defensive line. Hopefully the best players will emerge and get the most playing time come regular season.

DenverBrit
06-27-2009, 02:53 PM
No they needed another blocking TE and a 5-9 nickel back

although I don't like what the FO has and is doing this offseason I'm hoping for the best :approve:


Me too.

footstepsfrom#27
06-27-2009, 03:04 PM
But you don't have faith in his ability to judge talent?
If there were any DL available and worth drafting, don't you think the Broncos would have taken them?
Turn the question around backwards...defensive linemen were drafted by other teams so since there were none available worth drafting isn't it safe to assume they all screwed up?

See the problem here?

meangene
06-27-2009, 03:12 PM
Turn the question around backwards...defensive linemen were drafted by other teams so since there were none available worth drafting isn't it safe to assume they all screwed up?

See the problem here?

Naw, it just means we had players at other positions rated higher and stuck to our board. I'm sure no two teams had exactly the same draft board. Overall, though, it was not considered a great draft for defensive lineman and that is even more the case when you take all the 3-4 tweeners off the list. We won't know who was right or who screwed up for a few years. Overall, I like the PLAYERS we took. I think it will turn out to be a good draft for us.

footstepsfrom#27
06-27-2009, 03:19 PM
Naw, it just means we had players at other positions rated higher and stuck to our board. I'm sure no two teams had exactly the same draft board. Overall, though, it was not considered a great draft for defensive lineman and that is even more the case when you take all the 3-4 tweeners off the list. We won't know who was right or who screwed up for a few years. Overall, I like the PLAYERS we took. I think it will turn out to be a good draft for us.
Fair enough...but that's considerably different than, "If there were any DL available and worth drafting, don't you think the Broncos would have taken them?" The fact is...plenty of teams thought they WERE worth taking, and absent any track record for this FO on the draft yet...

You get the idea.

DenverBrit
06-27-2009, 03:23 PM
Turn the question around backwards...defensive linemen were drafted by other teams so since there were none available worth drafting isn't it safe to assume they all screwed up?

See the problem here?

I understand what you're saying.

The team will take time to rebuild a DL that has been neglected for years. Simply drafting bodies instead of the BPA makes no sense.
The Broncos already have plenty of 'backups'...... they need starters and Nolan apparently didn't see any, other than Ayers.
FA wasn't much better, this was a bad year to look for DL help.

24champ
06-27-2009, 03:25 PM
Naw, it just means we had players at other positions rated higher and stuck to our board.I'm sure no two teams had exactly the same draft board.

I'm sure teams didn't have just a 100 players on their board.

footstepsfrom#27
06-27-2009, 03:28 PM
I understand what you're saying.

The team will take time to rebuild a DL that has been neglected for years. Simply drafting bodies instead of the BPA makes no sense.
The Broncos already have plenty of 'backups'...... they need starters and Nolan apparently didn't see any, other than Ayers.
FA wasn't much better, this was a bad year to look for DL help.
I'm not trying to be argumenative here, but despite the fact that this was a generally weak draft overall...how do you reconcile the fact that about 1/4 of the players taken in the first 4 rounds were D-linemen if this was a bad year for that position? Are you saying all the other teams that drafted them were wrong? like Buff said...this position was over-represented. So NFL scouts apparently didn't see the year as a bad one...at least not relevant to the other position players taken in the same talent pool.

maher_tyler
06-27-2009, 03:32 PM
I'm concerned we're going into the season weak, weak, weak there (yet again).

We drafted just one D-lineman - and that guy is a LB now. The standard response from pro-Josh guys is that there was a dearth of talent in the draft ... but the facts disagree:

7 d-linemen drafted in Round 1
7 d-linemen drafted in Round 2
7 d-linemen drafted in Round 3
10 d-linemen drafted in Round 4


Obviously there were plenty of D-linemen out there ... in fact, 31 drafted in the first 135 picks shows D-linemen were actually OVER-represented in this draft.

Doesn't mean all of them will pan out...we had/have holes every where on D. I like the Smith pick...he'll have almost an imeadiate impact and can learn from Champ who isn't getting any younger.

DenverBrit
06-27-2009, 03:40 PM
I'm not trying to be argumenative here, but despite the fact that this was a generally weak draft overall...how do you reconcile the fact that about 1/4 of the players taken in the first 4 rounds were D-linemen if this was a bad year for that position? Are you saying all the other teams that drafted them were wrong? like Buff said...this position was over-represented. So NFL scouts apparently didn't see the year as a bad one...at least not relevant to the other position players taken in the same talent pool.

No, I'm saying that Nolan apparently didn't see 'starters' in that crop.

The Broncos already have plenty of 'backup' quality DLs, why pick more instead of the BPA?

My recollection was that most observers thought this a down year for D lineman.

cutthemdown
06-27-2009, 03:49 PM
I feel its best to draft players you think will make good nfl starters, regardless of position. If there are 2 player that you have even, take the player that fits the greater need.

For sure search out the talent pool for people who fit how you like football to be played. IE size over speed, speed and athletic ability over size, how smart they are.

But to actually say ok we need 2 dlineman, 2 linebackers, and for sure no corners or TE would be really shortsighted and armchair type bush league football operations.

cutthemdown
06-27-2009, 03:52 PM
Doesn't mean all of them will pan out...we had/have holes every where on D. I like the Smith pick...he'll have almost an imeadiate impact and can learn from Champ who isn't getting any younger.

I think Champ can have 2-3 more productive yrs at corner, then maybe a couple more at FS. I really think he is talented enough to do that switch like Rod Woodson did lateer in his career.

DenverBrit
06-27-2009, 03:59 PM
When it comes to evaluating D lineman, I'm going to trust this guy more than Burney or the DCs they had on the staff in Shanny's tenure.

Nolan and Nunnely were the one's evaluating the DL talent available.
For now, I'm going to trust their judgment.
I'm sure they have a 'plan'. ;D

http://www.denverbroncos.com/resources/custom/Staff%20Photos/2009/nunnely_wayne_mug09.jpg

Wayne Nunnely

Defensive Line
Wayne Nunnely begins his first season as defensive line coach for the Denver Broncos in 2009 after spending the previous 12 years coaching that position for the San Diego Chargers. Nunnely, who has 33 years of coaching experience, is in his 15th year coaching at the NFL level and was named to his current position on Jan. 21, 2009.

One of the first African-American head coaches at the Division I-level during a stint at the University of Nevada-Las Vegas from 1986-89, Nunnely spent 18 years coaching in college before starting his NFL coaching career in 1995 as New Orleans' defensive line coach. He served in that capacity until the 1997 season when he began coaching in San Diego, where he became tied as the second-longest tenured assistant coach in Chargers history.

During his 12 seasons with the Chargers, Nunnely's defensive line helped San Diego rank second in the NFL in yards per carry allowed (3.7) and third in rushing yards per game allowed (97.2) over that period. Nunnely's unit led the NFL in fewest rushing yards per game twice (1998, 2005) and had the league's lowest yards per carry average during three different seasons (1998-99, 2001).

San Diego also was adept at forcing sacks with Nunnely on staff and totaled the sixth-most sacks (355) in the league from 2000-08, including an NFL-high 177 sacks from 2005-08. Chargers defensive tackle Jamal Williams developed into one of the best interior linemen in the NFL under Nunnely, earning three consecutive trips to the Pro Bowl (2005-07).

As a team, the Chargers enjoyed one of the most prosperous periods in club history with Nunnely on staff. San Diego won four division titles during Nunnely's time as defensive line coach, including three consecutive AFC West crowns from 2006-08.

The Chargers advanced to the AFC Championship Game in 2007 for the first time in 13 seasons with Nunnely's defensive line helping the club rank fifth in the NFL and second in the AFC with 42 sacks. A year earlier in 2006, San Diego registered a league-high 61 sacks that marked the second most in franchise history for a season and the most by a Chargers team in 20 seasons.

Nunnely's defensive linemen were part of a San Diego run defense in 2005 that ranked first in the NFL in rushing yards per game allowed (84.3) and third in yards per carry allowed (3.5) while tying for fifth in the league in sacks (46). Williams earned the first Pro Bowl selection of his career, and defensive end Luis Castillo was a consensus all-rookie selection.

San Diego was third in the league against the run (81.7 ypg. / 3.7 avg.) in 2004 after giving up a league-low 3.3 yards per rush in 2001, a year in which defensive end Marcellus Wiley had 13 sacks under Nunnely's instruction to earn Pro Bowl honors.

From 1998-99, the Chargers' defensive line was the NFL's best at stopping the run with Nunnely's group helping the club lead the league in fewest yards per carry allowed during each of those seasons. San Diego set franchise single-season records for lowest yards per rush allowed (2.7) and fewest rushing yards per game allowed (71.3) in 1998. The Chargers' 2.7 yards per carry average was the lowest season total by an NFL team since the 1970 merger while their 71.3 yards per game average was the fourth-lowest year total by an NFL team since the 16-game schedule was implemented in 1978.

During two seasons (1995-96) as the Saints' defensive line coach, Nunnely coached on a defense that tied for the sixth-most sacks (85) in the NFL during that period. New Orleans' 44 sacks in Nunnely's first year with the club in 1996 tied for fourth in the league.

Nunnely spent four years (1991-94) as a position coach in the Pacific-10 Conference before beginning his NFL coaching career. He instructed the defensive line at UCLA from 1993-94 after coaching running backs at the University of Southern California from 1991-92.

In 1990, Nunnely worked at his alma mater, UNLV, as its director of minority student affairs after concluding his four-year career as its head coach. At the time of his hire in 1986, he became the first African-American head coach on the West Coast along with just the fifth in Division I-A history. Nunnely and Cleve Bryant became the first African-American head coaches in Division I-A history to coach against each other with Nunnely's squad defeating Ohio University 26-18 during the 1988 season.

Before being named head coach at UNLV, Nunnely was its running backs coach from 1982-85. He also coached the position at the University of the Pacific from 1980-81 and had stints at Cal-State Fullerton (defensive line in 1979), Cal-Poly Pomona (defensive line in 1978 and running backs in 1977) and UNLV (graduate assistant in 1976).

Nunnely's coaching career began in 1975 as an assistant coach for Valley High School in Las Vegas after competing as a student athlete at UNLV, where he played fullback and lettered in track. He received a bachelor's degree in physical education from UNLV in 1975 and was voted the school's Most Outstanding Male Physical Educator.

Born on March 29, 1952, in Los Angeles, Nunnely competed in football and track at Monrovia High School in Monrovia, Calif. He is married to Velda, and they have three sons (Steven, Channing and Aaron) and one daughter (Amber).

Kaylore
06-27-2009, 04:06 PM
It is problematic that we've got guys like Peterson and McBean ahead of more talented players like Marcus Thomas merely because they fit the 3-4 better.

The system is supposed to fit the better players, not vice versa.

I agree and disagree. You need to build toward a system and commit to drafting players that fit that system for at least five years to create some kind continuity and chemistry. Once you have a system of role players it's easier to find and replace each role guy than to reformat your entire defense to fit your scheme every year.

HOWEVER

I agree that it's important to not be so tied to scheme that on game day you are sucking unnecessarily when there are guys on your bench that can help you win. That said, whenever you commit to a certain scheme you have to allow for the adjustment period as the FO cycles in the new players that fit and cycles out the old ones that don't.

And our defense was garbage last year so I don' think anyone can make the case that we're somehow ruining things by changing it all up.

And for the people whining about the draft, it's not a shopping list. You can't go "we need defensive linemen" and then go get one just 'cause you need one. They need to A) not suck and B) Fit your scheme. There were not any true 3-4 nose tackles this draft. Everyone is pointing to Ron Brace, but he wasn't even that true of a NT. We won't know for a few years who is right or wrong anyway. Also, defensive linemen take three years to develop so even if we drafted nose tackle this draft he still wouldn't start and functionally the team would perform the same.

BroncoBuff
06-27-2009, 04:11 PM
although I don't like what the FO has and is doing this offseason I'm hoping for the best :approve:

Very nicely said ... I think that capsulizes what most folks are thinking.

meangene
06-27-2009, 04:17 PM
Fair enough...but that's considerably different than, "If there were any DL available and worth drafting, don't you think the Broncos would have taken them?" The fact is...plenty of teams thought they WERE worth taking, and absent any track record for this FO on the draft yet...

You get the idea.

Yeah, I do. But, I'm willing to give them some time before passing judgment on either the draft or other personnel decisions. And, I don't think the quality coaching on the defensive side of the ball can be underestimated.

BroncoBuff
06-27-2009, 04:18 PM
During his 12 seasons with the Chargers, Nunnely's defensive line helped San Diego rank second in the NFL in yards per carry allowed (3.7)

Man, 3.7 ypc is the 2nd best over that span?

Sammy Winder's career average is less than that ... :~ohyah!:

BroncoInferno
06-27-2009, 04:18 PM
I have faith in Mike Nolan, I really do.

But any reasonable, objective appraisal of our current D-would be that it's a real mess. Our three starters in the 3-4 alignment:

Ryan McBean - has played in only one game ever, in 2007
Ron Fields has just 9 career starts ... all in 2006. ONE career sack in 4 seasons.
Kenny Peterson (although I've been his biggest supporter on the board), just 1 start in six seasons
That is not a confidence-inspiring trio, not by a long shot. I daresay Ekuban is better than any of the three (though albeit a graybeard now). "The market" has spoken on these three ... they're all castoffs.

And not a word outta Dove Valley this offseason about Marcus Thomas or Carlton Powell? That seems strange ... those three starters ahead of them ... is that a Shanahan player purge of some kind ???

You mentioned the sack total. One thing to keep in mind is that 3-4 lineman do not typically get very many sacks. The linebackers are depended on for the pass rush. The lineman are supposed hold up blockers so the linebackers can make plays.

That said, you certainly can't argue with the fact that our guys lack experience. It could be a problem, but since the group can focus primarily on run defense that will require a less exacting skill set than the 4-3 does. In other words, I think you can mask DL talent deficiencies a little better in the 3-4 than the 4-3. That's not to say you can have three bums out there or that we won't have some problems, but I am more optimistic about our DL with the 3-4 switch than I would be if we were going to continue with the 4-3.

DBroncos4life
06-27-2009, 04:18 PM
3 out of 4 LBs are going to be in place this year. Personally I think Davis is a under rated LB but I still think someone will replace him towards the end of the year. If the front 3 can atleast play avg I think our make shift 3-4 will be better then most people think.

BroncoInferno
06-27-2009, 04:20 PM
Turn the question around backwards...defensive linemen were drafted by other teams so since there were none available worth drafting isn't it safe to assume they all screwed up?

See the problem here?

Not really. It could be that those teams were desperate enough for lineman that they ignored the fact that the crop of DL was weak overall and overdrafted them out of need.

BroncoBuff
06-27-2009, 04:28 PM
7 d-linemen drafted in Round 1
7 d-linemen drafted in Round 2
7 d-linemen drafted in Round 3
10 d-linemen drafted in Round 4

Alotta great feedback in this thread, so I suppose I'll come clean on a slight concealment ... there were actually ZERO d-linemen taken in the fifth round and just 5 in the sixth ;D

Another point here ... I think at least one of the three CFA d-linemen will pop up and contribute ... Baker, Pedelesceau or Rulon. My money's on Baker to make the active roster and the other two the PS. That'd be a good poll.

BroncoInferno
06-27-2009, 04:34 PM
Alotta great feedback in this thread, so I suppose I'll come clean on a slight concealment ... there were actually ZERO d-linemen taken in the fifth round and just 5 in the sixth ;D

Another point here ... I think at least one of the three CFA d-linemen will pop up and contribute ... Baker, Pedelesceau or Rulon. My money's on Baker to make the active roster and the other two the PS. That'd be a good poll.

Like I said, just because a lot of lineman may have been drafted does not mean that the crop of DL wasn't weak. Teams overdraft out of need all the time. That was one of the criticisms against Shanny the GM (i.e. Macus Nash, Deltha O'Neal, the 2005 draft where three of the four picks were corners, the 2007 draft where three of the four picks were DL, etc).

BroncoBuff
06-27-2009, 04:46 PM
Not really. It could be that those teams were desperate enough for lineman that they ignored the fact that the crop of DL was weak overall and overdrafted them out of need.

That's sorta backwards reasoning ... everybody reached but us? Despite the fact we had the greatest need of any team? PLUS, Josh was obviously super-aggressive moving up I think three times ... isn'ty it logical you move up for need? To each hs own I guess.

BI whadd'ya think about the three CFAs?

BroncoBuff
06-27-2009, 04:50 PM
It was the Best of Times ... it was the Worst of Times ...


It is very possible - perhaps even likely - that we'll have the BEST O-line in the league and the WORST D-line in the league.

Food for thought .....

Br0nc0Buster
06-27-2009, 04:57 PM
These arguments just reek of desperation

McDaniels already said he drafts by "player not position"

But everyone wants the quick fix, wants him to magically fix all our holes in one offseason
This defense is going to take at least a couple years to fix, and that is assuming the players we aquire pan out.

McDaniels doesnt know how our current players will do, he already said he didnt see a point in drafting a guy to fill a position if we may not even be able to beat out the current crop we have.

This is an evaluation process, and unfortunately you cant evaluate linemen in april.

Last year everyone was worried about our offensive tackles, "Clady is a rookie, and Harris hasnt looked good, we are screwed". Its not like ? always mean suck

I have yet to see anyone suggest we will field a stud line, but is it completely impossible that the guys we have could end up being serviceable?

Would McDaniels like a line of Seymore, Wilfork, and Warren? of course but he also realizes that his goal is to improve the TEAM, and not just invest all his resources into one position

BroncoInferno
06-27-2009, 04:58 PM
That's sorta backwards reasoning ... everybody reached but us? Despite the fact we had the greatest need of any team? PLUS, Josh was obviously super-aggressive moving up I think three times ... isn'ty it logical you move up for need? To each hs own I guess.

BI whadd'ya think about the three CFAs?

It's not backwards thinking at all. It is totally common for teams to draft out of need rather taking the BPA. Obviously, Josh has made clear that he has a philosophy of selecting whom he perceives to be the best football players and not overdraft out of need. Plenty of teams do not have that philosophy and are in "win now" mode, so they select players they need now even though there may be better players available (again, look to several Shanny dafts as examples).

And, no, I don't think you necessarily move up out of need. You can also move up if there is a player you love, a player whom you had rated highly on your board. I think both Smith and the TE are examples of the that. Neither were at a position of huge need, but whether you agree or not McDaniels obviously thought highly enough of both to move up to secure them.

Br0nc0Buster
06-27-2009, 05:02 PM
That's sorta backwards reasoning ... everybody reached but us? Despite the fact we had the greatest need of any team? PLUS, Josh was obviously super-aggressive moving up I think three times ... isn'ty it logical you move up for need? To each hs own I guess.

BI whadd'ya think about the three CFAs?

That wasnt our plan in the draft.
We moved up for a TE, a CB, and a QB, and I think another position

None were really pressing needs

Josh liked the PLAYER, and thought the player was worth the extra pick.

BroncoInferno
06-27-2009, 05:14 PM
It's not backwards thinking at all. It is totally common for teams to draft out of need rather taking the BPA. Obviously, Josh has made clear that he has a philosophy of selecting whom he perceives to be the best football players and not overdraft out of need. Plenty of teams do not have that philosophy and are in "win now" mode, so they select players they need now even though there may be better players available (again, look to several Shanny dafts as examples).

And, no, I don't think you necessarily move up out of need. You can also move up if there is a player you love, a player whom you had rated highly on your board. I think both Smith and the TE are examples of the that. Neither were at a position of huge need, but whether you agree or not McDaniels obviously thought highly enough of both to move up to secure them.

Furthermore, just because the Broncos did not select a DL in the draft does mean they literally did not like any of them. It simply means that when the various picks were on the clock, there was at least one player they liked better value wise. Maybe the team liked Brace, but saw him as more of a 3rd or 4th round guy, whereas McDaniels has stated Smith was the highest rated corner on their board. Or maybe they liked him as a 2nd rounder but simply liked Smith more. Either way, you have to trust your board, IMHO. That does not mean they got it right, but we arguing about the merits of the philosophy at this point, and I think the reasoning behind the draft was sound. We'll see in a couple of years how the specific players pan out.

footstepsfrom#27
06-27-2009, 05:15 PM
Not really. It could be that those teams were desperate enough for lineman that they ignored the fact that the crop of DL was weak overall and overdrafted them out of need.
Translation; they all reached and we didn't.

That's a bit of a stretch don't you think?

Tombstone RJ
06-27-2009, 05:47 PM
Nolan needs to mask any defensive line weaknesses by keeping each dlineman's assignment simple. He also needs to know what each player brings to the table and then insert that player into the defense at the correct time. There ain't no getting around the perceived lack of talent of this group. For better or worse, they are who they are. It will be up to Nunnelly and Nolan to bring out the best in them and to minimize the defensive line's weaknesses (which at this point is interior size). A 2 gap defensive line is actually much harder to master than a 1 gap 4-3 defense. What the 2 gap defensive lineman has to do is line up face to face with the offensive lineman and keep that offensive lineman from getting blocking angles and reaching the second level. More or less they have to clog the middle by engaging the offensive lineman dictating where the play goes. It's a difficult assignment to master because it's very reactionary. You don't just shoot a gap and hope for the best.

oubronco
06-27-2009, 05:53 PM
Powell is the one that intriques me the most if he can do what he did at VaTech we'll have a player on the line for a change

oubronco
06-27-2009, 06:06 PM
Don't forget about this guy

By Gray Caldwell
DenverBroncos.com
ENGLEWOOD, Colo. -- It's the first day of the team's final minicamp, and the music blaring from the speakers has begun to die down. Suddenly, Michael Jackson's "Beat It" kicks in, and one player inevitably begins to show off some dance moves.
A 6-foot-2, 326-pound defensive lineman is dancing and laughing on the sideline -- the same player who one week later would help judge a touchdown dance contest at the Denver Broncos Boys and Girls Club.
It's Chris Baker (http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=498&contentID=9876), who proclaims that "dance is my thing." The rookie free agent is a lot of fun off the field, but when he steps in between the white lines, it's all business.
"Right now I'm just doing whatever the coaches ask me to do and wherever I can contribute, that's what I'm going to do for this team," he said.
And if his time in college is any indication, he might be able to contribute at a variety of positions along the defensive line.
He began his collegiate career at Penn State University, where he earned a starting role in just his sophomore year. As a starter in 2007, he helped the Nittany Lions' defense finish No. 7 in the nation against the run, allowing only 87.9 rushing yards per game. He also led the defensive line in tackles in a season that culminated with a victory against Texas A&M in the Alamo Bowl.
During his two seasons at Penn State, he played in 20 games and recorded 43 tackles and 4.5 sacks. Baker transferred to Hampton University for his junior season, but he said he feels the experience he gained playing in the competitive Big Ten Conference
"I'm pretty sure it helps, because a lot of the guys from the Big Ten you're going to see in the NFL," he said. "A lot of times we went to bowl games, and we played against the Tennessees and Florida States, so you're going to go against NFL talent. It really helps just going against some of the quote-unquote best players in the country."
At Hampton he proved that theory, anchoring the Pirates' defensive line and showing a knack for making big plays at both the nose tackle position and defensive end. He totaled 69 tackles, 8.5 sacks -- for 60 yards lost -- and one blocked kick in 11 games.
Baker's play earned him first-team All-MEAC honors, and after one season with the Pirates, he felt he was ready for a jump to the professional ranks.
"I just felt like I didn't have a lot more to prove at Hampton," he said. "I went in there and I did what I expected to do."
So the 326-pound defensive lineman started preparing for the NFL Draft. He was invited to the NFL Combine and he put on a solid show, finishing ninth in the vertical jump among defensive linemen and tying with Robert Ayers (http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=498&contentID=9871) in the 20-yard shuttle run.
Then April 25 rolled around, and Baker said he was told he could be picked anywhere from the second round to the fourth round. By the end of April 26, he was a free agent, having gone undrafted. He said it was a disappointment, but a number of teams started calling right away trying to sign him.
The Broncos were one of those teams, and Baker said he believed he could make an impact on the defensive line in Denver right away, so he headed to Dove Valley.
"Everything just didn't work out with the draft process, but I'm happy that I'm here," he said. "I've got my opportunity and now I've just got to make the best of my opportunity."
That opportunity started when he signed as an undrafted free agent on April 27, and has continued throughout two minicamps, passing camp and offseason conditioning that ends on Friday. He said he has been working to impress coaches and teammates alike throughout his two months in Denver, and the defensive line as a whole has been very accepting of him and the rest of the rookies. They're willing to help out with the playbook and even with plays during practice, Baker said.
"They'll pick on you in the locker room, though," he smiled. "That's about it."
One of the most helpful parts about camps so far has been getting a small taste of the Broncos offensive line, which allowed just 12 sacks last season and helped the team tie for second in the league with a 4.8-yards-per-carry rushing average. Baker said facing that unit, even without pads on, has been a big benefit.
"It always helps to go against the best," he said. "If you go against the best you're going to make yourself better. So it's a benefit to have a good O-line like the one we have here."
That same benefit could come in handy for the defensive line as a whole. Baker said he's looking forward to training camp, where the unit can begin to come together and prepare to silence some of its critics when the 2009 campaign rolls around.
"People are always going to have their opinion, but all you can do is work hard and just do the best that you can do," he said. "When the season comes, just work as hard as you can and do what you can do and let your play talk for itself."

DenverBrit
06-27-2009, 06:39 PM
Man, 3.7 ypc is the 2nd best over that span?

Sammy Winder's career average is less than that ... :~ohyah!:

I like this 98/99 stat better. :D

The Chargers' 2.7 yards per carry average was the lowest season total by an NFL team since the 1970 merger while their 71.3 yards per game average was the fourth-lowest year total by an NFL team since the 16-game schedule was implemented in 1978.

But, gotta have the talent.

Tombstone RJ
06-27-2009, 06:53 PM
Don't forget about this guy

By Gray Caldwell
DenverBroncos.com
ENGLEWOOD, Colo. -- It's the first day of the team's final minicamp, and the music blaring from the speakers has begun to die down. Suddenly, Michael Jackson's "Beat It" kicks in, and one player inevitably begins to show off some dance moves.
A 6-foot-2, 326-pound defensive lineman is dancing and laughing on the sideline -- the same player who one week later would help judge a touchdown dance contest at the Denver Broncos Boys and Girls Club.
It's Chris Baker (http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=498&contentID=9876), who proclaims that "dance is my thing." The rookie free agent is a lot of fun off the field, but when he steps in between the white lines, it's all business.
"Right now I'm just doing whatever the coaches ask me to do and wherever I can contribute, that's what I'm going to do for this team," he said.
And if his time in college is any indication, he might be able to contribute at a variety of positions along the defensive line.
He began his collegiate career at Penn State University, where he earned a starting role in just his sophomore year. As a starter in 2007, he helped the Nittany Lions' defense finish No. 7 in the nation against the run, allowing only 87.9 rushing yards per game. He also led the defensive line in tackles in a season that culminated with a victory against Texas A&M in the Alamo Bowl.
During his two seasons at Penn State, he played in 20 games and recorded 43 tackles and 4.5 sacks. Baker transferred to Hampton University for his junior season, but he said he feels the experience he gained playing in the competitive Big Ten Conference
"I'm pretty sure it helps, because a lot of the guys from the Big Ten you're going to see in the NFL," he said. "A lot of times we went to bowl games, and we played against the Tennessees and Florida States, so you're going to go against NFL talent. It really helps just going against some of the quote-unquote best players in the country."
At Hampton he proved that theory, anchoring the Pirates' defensive line and showing a knack for making big plays at both the nose tackle position and defensive end. He totaled 69 tackles, 8.5 sacks -- for 60 yards lost -- and one blocked kick in 11 games.
Baker's play earned him first-team All-MEAC honors, and after one season with the Pirates, he felt he was ready for a jump to the professional ranks.
"I just felt like I didn't have a lot more to prove at Hampton," he said. "I went in there and I did what I expected to do."
So the 326-pound defensive lineman started preparing for the NFL Draft. He was invited to the NFL Combine and he put on a solid show, finishing ninth in the vertical jump among defensive linemen and tying with Robert Ayers (http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=498&contentID=9871) in the 20-yard shuttle run.
Then April 25 rolled around, and Baker said he was told he could be picked anywhere from the second round to the fourth round. By the end of April 26, he was a free agent, having gone undrafted. He said it was a disappointment, but a number of teams started calling right away trying to sign him.
The Broncos were one of those teams, and Baker said he believed he could make an impact on the defensive line in Denver right away, so he headed to Dove Valley.
"Everything just didn't work out with the draft process, but I'm happy that I'm here," he said. "I've got my opportunity and now I've just got to make the best of my opportunity."
That opportunity started when he signed as an undrafted free agent on April 27, and has continued throughout two minicamps, passing camp and offseason conditioning that ends on Friday. He said he has been working to impress coaches and teammates alike throughout his two months in Denver, and the defensive line as a whole has been very accepting of him and the rest of the rookies. They're willing to help out with the playbook and even with plays during practice, Baker said.
"They'll pick on you in the locker room, though," he smiled. "That's about it."
One of the most helpful parts about camps so far has been getting a small taste of the Broncos offensive line, which allowed just 12 sacks last season and helped the team tie for second in the league with a 4.8-yards-per-carry rushing average. Baker said facing that unit, even without pads on, has been a big benefit.
"It always helps to go against the best," he said. "If you go against the best you're going to make yourself better. So it's a benefit to have a good O-line like the one we have here."
That same benefit could come in handy for the defensive line as a whole. Baker said he's looking forward to training camp, where the unit can begin to come together and prepare to silence some of its critics when the 2009 campaign rolls around.
"People are always going to have their opinion, but all you can do is work hard and just do the best that you can do," he said. "When the season comes, just work as hard as you can and do what you can do and let your play talk for itself."

Strange he wasn't drafted. In a weak dlineman draft you'd think he'd get a let round flyer. Also, why leave Penn State for Hampton? I don't get it.

p7superfly
06-27-2009, 07:06 PM
Reading this thread makes me sick that we traded our first rounder next year.

Teams will run on us all day. We'll run on teams, too ... the games should be quick.

If we go better than 7-9, it's a miracle.

p7superfly
06-27-2009, 07:09 PM
Next off-season:

We sign Cassel and Seymour as free agents.

gyldenlove
06-27-2009, 07:37 PM
These arguments just reek of desperation

McDaniels already said he drafts by "player not position"

But everyone wants the quick fix, wants him to magically fix all our holes in one offseason
This defense is going to take at least a couple years to fix, and that is assuming the players we aquire pan out.

McDaniels doesnt know how our current players will do, he already said he didnt see a point in drafting a guy to fill a position if we may not even be able to beat out the current crop we have.

This is an evaluation process, and unfortunately you cant evaluate linemen in april.

Last year everyone was worried about our offensive tackles, "Clady is a rookie, and Harris hasnt looked good, we are screwed". Its not like ? always mean suck

I have yet to see anyone suggest we will field a stud line, but is it completely impossible that the guys we have could end up being serviceable?

Would McDaniels like a line of Seymore, Wilfork, and Warren? of course but he also realizes that his goal is to improve the TEAM, and not just invest all his resources into one position

I like your thinking, a lot of people were skeptical last year about Harris and Clady, but they both stepped up and showed the value of high draft picks in turning a weak unit into a dominant unit pretty much over night.

It worries me that we are not using the same approach on the defensive line, it worked for our offensive line, it worked for New Englands defensive line, put some high draft picks into it and combine with outstanding coaching and you have success.

I think if anyone thinks that the players we had on the defensive line coming into the draft were going to beat out high draft picks, they are sorely mistaking. The defensive line was crap last year, we didn't add a single known good player to the mix, and yet these individuals are supposed to beat out people with league recoqnized talent. I find it sort of ironic that the same approach of not getting players who can't beat out the current guys didn't apply to say the CB position, RB position or TE position. I wonder why the DL is so special, that our current DLs, the weakest unit on the team gets a full season to prove their worth, while our CBs, TEs and RBs do not.

BroncoBuff
06-27-2009, 08:29 PM
These arguments just reek of desperation
McDaniels already said he drafts by "player not position"
What he "says" doesn't change the fact that by any objective standard, as lined out in the first post in this thread, our starting D-line is a mess.

And there's nothing "desperate" about ackowledging that reality.

No "strategy," no "philosophy" can change this reality. It looks like - absent some 11th hour upgrade - we're just gonna have to ride it out.


But everyone wants the quick fix, wants him to magically fix all our holes in one offseason. This defense is going to take at least a couple years to fix, and that is assuming the players we aquire pan out.
Magically? Nobody said "magically," and nobody said "quick fix."

What I'm saying is that in the last two years, this team has failed BY UNIT. Stick with me here ... in 2007 we had the worst DTs in the league, and accordingly, that unit was exploited mercilessly - a HUGE home loss to Jax where they had 10+ and 7 minute drives. In 2008, we had the worst safeties in the league, and teams ran crossing patterns and underneath routes all over. Somebody posted a while back that the 2008 Broncos defense had the worst 3rd down completion percentage against them in the modern era.

Now, offensive attacks in this league are very, very tightly planned, and teams WILL find your weak link and exploit it. Like they say, you're only as ghood as your weakest link. I think we found that out these last two seasons. In light of these failures BY UNIT these past twio seasons, I think it's dangerous to go into the season with another Unit that is a gaping hole at best. Three castoffs, two of which have never started in the league, and one of which sarted for just half a season three years ago.

I'm not talking "quick fix," I'm talking patching the gaping holes with an experienced, reasonably priced rental who will shore up that weakest of units and give us a chance for the next a couple years while we rebuild. TEAMS DO THIS ALL THE TIME, teams even win doing it. You'll recall we rented a patch player who was critical to a huge year, Jumpy Geathers. Along these lines, for example, why not use the Lonnie Paxton money on Grady Jackson instead? Or Vonnie Holliday? Which new player do you think would give us a better chance to win more games, Paxton or Grady? (If you answered the former, there's really nothing left for you and I to discuss :()

It doesn't even have to be have to be Paxton money ... but going into the season with this group is courting disaster, a la '07 and '08 as I lined out above. In my opinion, of course.

SoCalBronco
06-27-2009, 09:08 PM
Our current DL is Epic Hossa.

http://photos-h.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc1/hs102.snc1/4559_91534794267_705494267_1783831_4176070_n.jpg

watermock
06-27-2009, 09:19 PM
I'll be surprised if surpass 5 wns.

footstepsfrom#27
06-27-2009, 10:33 PM
Strange he wasn't drafted. In a weak dlineman draft you'd think he'd get a let round flyer. Also, why leave Penn State for Hampton? I don't get it.
Paterno kicked him off the team for violating team rules when he was arrested and charged with assault and criminal trespass for involvement in a fight on campus. It's been discussed in here quite a bit. He's a character risk.

watermock
06-27-2009, 10:36 PM
Baker MIGHT work out.

footstepsfrom#27
06-27-2009, 10:42 PM
The Broncos were one of those teams, and Baker said he believed he could make an impact on the defensive line in Denver right away, so he headed to Dove Valley.
Of course he did. I bet he took one look at this pile and started doing cartwheels down a flight of stairs. If our D-line UDFA's appear to have a bit more talent than the other positions where those types are brought in, it's probably because any player looking at where they have the best shot at making it is going to seek out the team with the weakest talent to compete with. I guess that's both both good and bad...hopefully this kid and one or two others can hang around long enough to figure it out.

Broncos_OTM
06-28-2009, 12:19 AM
Vonnie and Grady Jackson and other similar FAs were such graybeards, seems Nolan and McD don't wanna go that route.

It's gonna be a rough '09 I think.
I guessi should have been more clear. If MCD and Nolan didnt want to go the gray beard way then explai9n our FA Signess

Broncos_OTM
06-28-2009, 12:32 AM
Strange he wasn't drafted. In a weak dlineman draft you'd think he'd get a let round flyer. Also, why leave Penn State for Hampton? I don't get it.
He got in trouble at Penn State. mayhbe he thought he needed a new start. I am sure the problems he got in up there followed him around. Sometimes fresh starts reallly due help

BroncoBuff
06-28-2009, 12:34 AM
please explain Brian Dawkins then. or Goodman or hill. Davis.... Clearly they either dont want him or cant afford him. a team with a glaring need at the position would have looked at him
Dawkins and Hill were IMMENSE needs, I love both. I'm not sold on Goodman though, wish we had kept Bly (he'd be fine with a real pass rush), and Andra Davis knows and can captain the 3-4.

So I guess I'm not sure what you're asking ... these veterans (and graybeards) you list are exactly what I'm recommending for the D-Line: experienced, reasonably priced players whom we can rent to stick their fingers in the dyke while we rebuild with youngsters, as such:

McBath, Bruton and Barrett will take over for Dawkins and Hill in due time ...

Alphonso Smith will take over for Goodman (I predict by Week 8) ...

And perhaps Spencer Larsen will take over for Andra Davis.



So then why not, for example:

Carlton Powell/Chris Baker behind a Grady Jackson ....

MT and McBean behind a Vonnie Holliday?


They plugged the holes everywhere EXCEPT where we needed them plugged the most, D-line.

BroncoBuff
06-28-2009, 12:43 AM
I'm not sold on Goodman though, wish we had kept Bly ... he wouldda been fine with a real pass rush

.... and cutting Bly and signing Goodman was a heinous waste of money. IIRC, we pay Bly the same amount whether he's on the roster or not. So Goodman's entire salary is a redundant waste of resources. Goodman's plus Paxton's salaries would equal Grady Jackson. Grady is old, but he is solid as a rock against the run, an honest to goodness real life 3-4 NT.

Broncos_OTM
06-28-2009, 12:50 AM
Vonnie and Grady Jackson and other similar FAs were such graybeards, seems Nolan and McD don't wanna go that route.

It's gonna be a rough '09 I think.
I guessi should have been more clear. If MCD and Nolan didnt want to go the gray beard way then explai9n our FA Signess

_Oro_
06-28-2009, 06:09 AM
The Bly cutting was 100% about attitude.

elsid13
06-28-2009, 07:03 AM
But you don't have faith in his ability to judge talent?
If there were any DL available and worth drafting, don't you think the Broncos would have taken them?
I doubt anyone in the Broncos organization thinks that the D can be fixed in less than 2-3 years.

Nolan did an awesome job in building the talent on SF's front 7 and defense line.

And back to your point, there were a number of strong candidates in the latter rounds with high potential that could with experience become very solid defense line players. IF this a rebuilding job, then FO should had looked to get some of that young potential talent in the latter rounds and developed them in the season to get us were we want to be.

elsid13
06-28-2009, 07:07 AM
Strange he wasn't drafted. In a weak dlineman draft you'd think he'd get a let round flyer. Also, why leave Penn State for Hampton? I don't get it.

He didn't leave voluntarily, he was kicked off the team due beating some kids head in after getting trouble for another fight a week before.

Cito Pelon
06-28-2009, 07:26 AM
No, I'm saying that Nolan apparently didn't see 'starters' in that crop.

The Broncos already have plenty of 'backup' quality DLs, why pick more instead of the BPA?

My recollection was that most observers thought this a down year for D lineman.

You can try to explain that 400,000 more times and he's not gonna get it, nor will a lot of the posters around here. It's just too complicated for them to understand I guess.

footstepsfrom#27
06-28-2009, 07:45 AM
You can try to explain that 400,000 more times and he's not gonna get it, nor will a lot of the posters around here. It's just too complicated for them to understand I guess.
So you're implying I'm stupid. Is that what you honestly think, or just an ad hominem brought on by the frustration that I don't see it like you do?

I rather doubt that the other teams that took D-line help in the draft all thought they were drafting with a mentality that none of these guys would become starters. Most teams take some sort of BPA approach, even if they modify it somewhat by taking a player for a position of need a couple spots higher than he should go. That's not a big deal unless they're reaching considerably farther than that. Essentially you're suggesting our rookie front office simply knows more than anyone else. Fine...fans are entitled to be unreasonably biased. It's the nature of being a fan I suppose.

It's not that I don't get it...I just see it differently than you do. If you think that makes me stupid or lacking in basic intelligence I suggest you're the one having a problem with comprehension.

footstepsfrom#27
06-28-2009, 07:49 AM
.... and cutting Bly and signing Goodman was a heinous waste of money. IIRC, we pay Bly the same amount whether he's on the roster or not. So Goodman's entire salary is a redundant waste of resources. Goodman's plus Paxton's salaries would equal Grady Jackson. Grady is old, but he is solid as a rock against the run, an honest to goodness real life 3-4 NT.
Buff are you sure? Why is that? Was he on some kind of guaranteed contract? Usually only the signing bonus is locked in...what's his deal specify?

footstepsfrom#27
06-28-2009, 07:52 AM
He got in trouble at Penn State. mayhbe he thought he needed a new start. I am sure the problems he got in up there followed him around. Sometimes fresh starts reallly due help
Joe Pa thought he needed a new start...it's been stated several times now and discussed at length before this so I don't know why this is getting missed. He might be a bargan or he might be a head case...time will tell.

oubronco
06-28-2009, 08:15 AM
The Bly cutting was 100% about attitude.

yea his play was stellar :thumbs:

400HZ
06-28-2009, 08:19 AM
So you're implying I'm stupid. Is that what you honestly think, or just an ad hominem brought on by the frustration that I don't see it like you do?

I rather doubt that the other teams that took D-line help in the draft all thought they were drafting with a mentality that none of these guys would become starters. Most teams take some sort of BPA approach, even if they modify it somewhat by taking a player for a position of need a couple spots higher than he should go. That's not a big deal unless they're reaching considerably farther than that. Essentially you're suggesting our rookie front office simply knows more than anyone else. Fine...fans are entitled to be unreasonably biased. It's the nature of being a fan I suppose.

It's not that I don't get it...I just see it differently than you do. If you think that makes me stupid or lacking in basic intelligence I suggest you're the one having a problem with comprehension.

You have to look at 3-4 type players specifically. One thing about the "Patriot Way" is that they do not acquire a player unless he fits almost perfectly with what they want to do system-wise. McDaniels seems to be following that formula pretty closely, although neccessity forced teams to be less picky. Look at the players who were drafted to play in 3-4 DL positions. There weren't alot:

#3 Tyson Jackson - incredible reach for a non-impact player with average measurables
#9 B.J. Raji - has the size but a skillset does not match his intended position as well as you would normally want at #9 overall
#32 Ziggy Hood - big fan of his in college, but low upside for a first round pick. His ceiling is as a servicable starter with utility on passing downs
#40 Ron Brace - a project player with high bust potential
#67 Alex Magee - drafted entirely on measurables, and even then those aren't that good of a 3-4 fit
#68 Jarron Gilbert - the college production at a small school was simply not there and he went to a 4-3 team
#113 Vaughn Martin - a project from CANADA going in the 4th should tell you alot

There weren't even any DL taken in the 5th. It was a terrible class for 3-4 players, and a terrible year to be switching systems.

footstepsfrom#27
06-28-2009, 08:38 AM
You have to look at 3-4 type players specifically. One thing about the "Patriot Way" is that they do not acquire a player unless he fits almost perfectly with what they want to do system-wise. McDaniels seems to be following that formula pretty closely, although neccessity forced teams to be less picky. Look at the players who were drafted to play in 3-4 DL positions. There weren't alot:

#3 Tyson Jackson - incredible reach for a non-impact player with average measurables
#9 B.J. Raji - has the size but a skillset does not match his intended position as well as you would normally want at #9 overall
#32 Ziggy Hood - big fan of his in college, but low upside for a first round pick. His ceiling is as a servicable starter with utility on passing downs
#40 Ron Brace - a project player with high bust potential
#67 Alex Magee - drafted entirely on measurables, and even then those aren't that good of a 3-4 fit
#68 Jarron Gilbert - the college production at a small school was simply not there and he went to a 4-3 team
#113 Vaughn Martin - a project from CANADA going in the 4th should tell you alot

There weren't even any DL taken in the 5th. It was a terrible class for 3-4 players, and a terrible year to be switching systems.
So all 3-4 teams picking D-line guys were reaching or picking intended backups...I doubt that to be true. One name you forgot...Ayers doesn't fit this system as a D-line player...despite what we've heard so far. He's at least 25 pounds smaller than they'd like at DE and much like other 3-4 OLB prospects...he's a college DE expected to make the shift to a position he may or may not be able to play. I think he's got some nice talent but if we're being truthful here...he has some of the same issues for bust potential other players have...they just happened to like him, which is basiccally what you can say for any other player picked in this draft by any other team. There were very few "sure things". It's pretty tough to make a case for the fact that we alone didn't reach for players when our draft inclcuded Smith...who is in reality a 1st round pick ksince that's what we sacrified for him...and Quinn...who we needn't rehash at this point.

BTW...I've been reading reports coming out of the Packers camp that BJ Raji is impressive at the NT position...might be fluff...might not be. But this continous "out of position" stuff on a guy who is built like a classic NT is just silly. He's certainly no more out of position than Ayers is.

I don't care if people are positive on the draft...we should be in June. But I object to being told I and everyone else who doesn't drink the koolaid yet is an idiot. This FO has lots to prove...they've done nothing to earn credibility until we see these guys on the field and they're hardly exempt from criticism, let alone should that be interpreted as stupidity.

DenverBrit
06-28-2009, 08:49 AM
You can try to explain that 400,000 more times and he's not gonna get it, nor will a lot of the posters around here. It's just too complicated for them to understand I guess.

I've noticed. ;D

_Oro_
06-28-2009, 09:04 AM
yea his play was stellar :thumbs:

Okay his play sucked too but if he was a hardcore worker team first guy they probably would have kept him and not signed Goodman. Sorry I had to spell that out.

L'sDad
06-28-2009, 09:09 AM
I have faith in Mike Nolan, I really do.

But any reasonable, objective appraisal of our current D-would be that it's a real mess.



If you trust Mike Nolan, then why not trust that he likes these new guys?


He hand picked Ronald Fields. He apparently sees something he likes in Ryan McBean. Kenny Peterson should be solid. I don't see a great DL in the works, but I don't see the gloom and doom either.

Br0nc0Buster
06-28-2009, 09:23 AM
I like your thinking, a lot of people were skeptical last year about Harris and Clady, but they both stepped up and showed the value of high draft picks in turning a weak unit into a dominant unit pretty much over night.

It worries me that we are not using the same approach on the defensive line, it worked for our offensive line, it worked for New Englands defensive line, put some high draft picks into it and combine with outstanding coaching and you have success.

I think if anyone thinks that the players we had on the defensive line coming into the draft were going to beat out high draft picks, they are sorely mistaking. The defensive line was crap last year, we didn't add a single known good player to the mix, and yet these individuals are supposed to beat out people with league recoqnized talent. I find it sort of ironic that the same approach of not getting players who can't beat out the current guys didn't apply to say the CB position, RB position or TE position. I wonder why the DL is so special, that our current DLs, the weakest unit on the team gets a full season to prove their worth, while our CBs, TEs and RBs do not.

McDaniels himself said that what he liked about our d line was that they were young, with room for growth. Look at the ages of our linemen, I think outside of Peterson, Fields at like 26 might be the oldest guy. I think this is why it is different than the RBs and TEs because those spots are filled with veterans. Smith was drafted because our FO was in love with him, not because we had to instantly upgrade the position.

There wasnt much in the way of FA, and it does make sense why McDaniels and co. passed on linemen in the mid and late rounds(that was what he was referring to when he said he wasnt gonna draft players that may not beat out who we have)

Unless you honestly think guys like Brace and Ziggy, or whoever should have been drafted by us are superior players to Smith, Ayers, etc... then I think your argument is "desperate", because it sounds like you are fine with settling for lesser players

McDaniels may be wrong about how good our draftees are, but I at least am glad he chose them based on their potential skill level, not their position

Br0nc0Buster
06-28-2009, 09:34 AM
What he "says" doesn't change the fact that by any objective standard, as lined out in the first post in this thread, our starting D-line is a mess.

And there's nothing "desperate" about ackowledging that reality.

No "strategy," no "philosophy" can change this reality. It looks like - absent some 11th hour upgrade - we're just gonna have to ride it out.



Magically? Nobody said "magically," and nobody said "quick fix."

What I'm saying is that in the last two years, this team has failed BY UNIT. Stick with me here ... in 2007 we had the worst DTs in the league, and accordingly, that unit was exploited mercilessly - a HUGE home loss to Jax where they had 10+ and 7 minute drives. In 2008, we had the worst safeties in the league, and teams ran crossing patterns and underneath routes all over. Somebody posted a while back that the 2008 Broncos defense had the worst 3rd down completion percentage against them in the modern era.

Now, offensive attacks in this league are very, very tightly planned, and teams WILL find your weak link and exploit it. Like they say, you're only as ghood as your weakest link. I think we found that out these last two seasons. In light of these failures BY UNIT these past twio seasons, I think it's dangerous to go into the season with another Unit that is a gaping hole at best. Three castoffs, two of which have never started in the league, and one of which sarted for just half a season three years ago.

I'm not talking "quick fix," I'm talking patching the gaping holes with an experienced, reasonably priced rental who will shore up that weakest of units and give us a chance for the next a couple years while we rebuild. TEAMS DO THIS ALL THE TIME, teams even win doing it. You'll recall we rented a patch player who was critical to a huge year, Jumpy Geathers. Along these lines, for example, why not use the Lonnie Paxton money on Grady Jackson instead? Or Vonnie Holliday? Which new player do you think would give us a better chance to win more games, Paxton or Grady? (If you answered the former, there's really nothing left for you and I to discuss :()

It doesn't even have to be have to be Paxton money ... but going into the season with this group is courting disaster, a la '07 and '08 as I lined out above. In my opinion, of course.

Look we learned with Sam Adams that there is usually a reason guys like that are floating around in FA. Trust me the non addition of Grady Jackson is not gonna make or break this team. Also refer to my previous post where I mentioned the age of our line, and how our staff believes their best football is ahead of them.

I do think our line will struggle a bit, and I am perfectly fine with "riding it out" because our attempt to acquire the best players available would have greater benefits long term than drafting to fix a position.

and dont underestimate the benefits from coaching, look at the Chiefs for example.
Under Vermeil their offense was great, they were a machine on offense.
Then Herm comes and their offense goes to complete ****
Granted they lost Roaf and Green got hurt, but the fact is Herm was not able to replicate an offense anywhere near as good with a slightly less talented team.

I think Slowick was an epic fail of a coordinator, and I think our current staff will be able to get more out of our players than previously.

This year is an evualtion process for our line, risky move, but I think worst case scenario is we are just as bad as last year on the line, and we still went 8-8

Tombstone RJ
06-28-2009, 10:40 AM
Paterno kicked him off the team for violating team rules when he was arrested and charged with assault and criminal trespass for involvement in a fight on campus. It's been discussed in here quite a bit. He's a character risk.

I must have missed those threads, thanks for the info.

DenverBrit
06-28-2009, 11:20 AM
Nolan did an awesome job in building the talent on SF's front 7 and defense line.

And back to your point, there were a number of strong candidates in the latter rounds with high potential that could with experience become very solid defense line players. IF this a rebuilding job, then FO should had looked to get some of that young potential talent in the latter rounds and developed them in the season to get us were we want to be.

If Slowic were still DC, I would be second guessing the choices too.

If the potential was there, I'm confident that Nolan and Nunnely looked at those players, and the scouting reports, then passed for a reason.

BroncoBuff
06-28-2009, 01:04 PM
Buff are you sure? Why is that? Was he on some kind of guaranteed contract? Usually only the signing bonus is locked in...what's his deal specify?
Ahhh I don't have the exact recollection where I heard that ... but I do recall it was an excellent source, maybe med or Eddie Mac. Basically it was - we pay Bly the same money - or maybe just slightly more - whether he's on the roster or not. I'll pm those guys real quick maybe they'll recall.


You can try to explain that 400,000 more times and he's not gonna get it, nor will a lot of the posters around here. It's just too complicated for them to understand I guess.C'mon Cito that's going too far ... footsteps made an EXCELLENT point: 1/4 of the players drafted rounds 1-4 were D-linemen. Maybe Nolan didn't see many he liked, but alotta other teams did. Which means our opinions in here are absolutely validated. Maybe not by the Broncos, but by numerous other teams.

Infact, that's not even an opinion.... that's actually fact. Numbers don't lie, and teams don't draft by throwing darts.

gyldenlove
06-28-2009, 01:34 PM
McDaniels himself said that what he liked about our d line was that they were young, with room for growth. Look at the ages of our linemen, I think outside of Peterson, Fields at like 26 might be the oldest guy. I think this is why it is different than the RBs and TEs because those spots are filled with veterans. Smith was drafted because our FO was in love with him, not because we had to instantly upgrade the position.

There wasnt much in the way of FA, and it does make sense why McDaniels and co. passed on linemen in the mid and late rounds(that was what he was referring to when he said he wasnt gonna draft players that may not beat out who we have)

Unless you honestly think guys like Brace and Ziggy, or whoever should have been drafted by us are superior players to Smith, Ayers, etc... then I think your argument is "desperate", because it sounds like you are fine with settling for lesser players

McDaniels may be wrong about how good our draftees are, but I at least am glad he chose them based on their potential skill level, not their position

I don't see how our RB position was old, Torain and Hillis are both 2nd year players, Young and Hall are what, 3rd or 4th year players? How about TE, Graham is a team captain and not apparently going anywhere, Scheffler is a 4th year player not even out of his rookie contract, how many more TEs do we need?

Debating who is the better player in the draft is like debating which color is superior, green or blue. We can all come up with oppinion, but 99% of it is going to be pure nonsense.

My argument is this: you should always try to improve the team as much as possible. Do you do that by drafting the best player, or the player who is the biggest upgrade over the current stock of players?

I will say you do it through the latter option, if you have Peyton Manning as your QB, you don't draft a QB in the 1st round even though he is the concensus best player available, because he won't improve your team. If you have a defensive line full of rejects who have never been good enough to win a starting spot or even a key backup spot, it stands to reason that any player you can get high in the draft has a strong likelyhood of improving the overall talent of that position by a lot. I don't see how Mcbath is a big step up from what we have at FS or how Quinn is a big step up from Scheffler and Graham. I don't see how Smith is a huge step up for CBs.

Moreno seems like a good pick, he clearly upgrades the talent we at RB. Ayers is debatable, he clearly has some talent, but his lack of playing time in college doesn't bode well, and neither does the fact he is being switched to a new position. I think we could have improved the team more by adding talent and size to the DL rather than by getting backups.

oubronco
06-28-2009, 01:41 PM
So all 3-4 teams picking D-line guys were reaching or picking intended backups...I doubt that to be true. One name you forgot...Ayers doesn't fit this system as a D-line player...despite what we've heard so far. He's at least 25 pounds smaller than they'd like at DE and much like other 3-4 OLB prospects...he's a college DE expected to make the shift to a position he may or may not be able to play. I think he's got some nice talent but if we're being truthful here...he has some of the same issues for bust potential other players have...they just happened to like him, which is basiccally what you can say for any other player picked in this draft by any other team. There were very few "sure things". It's pretty tough to make a case for the fact that we alone didn't reach for players when our draft inclcuded Smith...who is in reality a 1st round pick ksince that's what we sacrified for him...and Quinn...who we needn't rehash at this point.

BTW...I've been reading reports coming out of the Packers camp that BJ Raji is impressive at the NT position...might be fluff...might not be. But this continous "out of position" stuff on a guy who is built like a classic NT is just silly. He's certainly no more out of position than Ayers is.

I don't care if people are positive on the draft...we should be in June. But I object to being told I and everyone else who doesn't drink the koolaid yet is an idiot. This FO has lots to prove...they've done nothing to earn credibility until we see these guys on the field and they're hardly exempt from criticism, let alone should that be interpreted as stupidity.


Packers | Raji working exclusively at defensive end

Sat, 27 Jun 2009 05:22:24 -0700

Kevin Seifert, of ESPN.com, reports Green Bay Packers DL B.J. Raji worked exclusively at defensive end during practice this week.

gyldenlove
06-28-2009, 01:42 PM
Look we learned with Sam Adams that there is usually a reason guys like that are floating around in FA. Trust me the non addition of Grady Jackson is not gonna make or break this team. Also refer to my previous post where I mentioned the age of our line, and how our staff believes their best football is ahead of them.

I do think our line will struggle a bit, and I am perfectly fine with "riding it out" because our attempt to acquire the best players available would have greater benefits long term than drafting to fix a position.

and dont underestimate the benefits from coaching, look at the Chiefs for example.
Under Vermeil their offense was great, they were a machine on offense.
Then Herm comes and their offense goes to complete ****
Granted they lost Roaf and Green got hurt, but the fact is Herm was not able to replicate an offense anywhere near as good with a slightly less talented team.

I think Slowick was an epic fail of a coordinator, and I think our current staff will be able to get more out of our players than previously.

This year is an evualtion process for our line, risky move, but I think worst case scenario is we are just as bad as last year on the line, and we still went 8-8

Exactly, Sam Adams proved that if you are sitting around in FA and not getting offers you are probably not very good, which is why I am not happy that our starting defensive line all sat around and got no offers in FA. All 3 players were FA scrubs. Yet somehow people think they are going to be better than Sam Adams who undeniably had talent and had performed at a very high level previously.

If we are riding it out, why did we trade away a 1st round pick for a 2nd round pick? if we are riding it out we should hang on to our own picks as much as possible and not trade away resources. The riding it out argument clashes with the fact that we gave up a 1st and 5th round pick next year to add talent this year.

Your Chiefs argument is entirely wrong. The Chiefs failed under Edwards because Vermeil and Peterson traded away all their assets and young players to try to get to the super bowl, when they failed and Vermeil was sent out of town, Edwards took over the oldest team (by some margin) in the league, that was completely devoid of young talent and had a lot of key players leave in short order or get injured. Where the Chiefs failed was in not replacing the players who left with players of similar talent, too many positions were filled with players of less talent.

We went 8-8 last year on the back of a franchise record passing offense, the head coach, offensive coordinator, QB coach and QB from that team are all gone. Even if we see some improvement on defense, and we will, it is going to be a big stretch to make up for that loss on offense.

oubronco
06-28-2009, 01:42 PM
Okay his play sucked too but if he was a hardcore worker team first guy they probably would have kept him and not signed Goodman. Sorry I had to spell that out.

Goodman isn't much if any better..............Sorry I had to spell that out for you ;)

elsid13
06-28-2009, 02:37 PM
If Slowic were still DC, I would be second guessing the choices too.

If the potential was there, I'm confident that Nolan and Nunnely looked at those players, and the scouting reports, then passed for a reason.

Since it appears that FO had only 100 names on its board, how do we even know if they had chance to look at them???

eddie mac
06-28-2009, 03:13 PM
Ahhh I don't have the exact recollection where I heard that ... but I do recall it was an excellent source, maybe med or Eddie Mac. Basically it was - we pay Bly the same money - or maybe just slightly more - whether he's on the roster or not. I'll pm those guys real quick maybe they'll recall.


C'mon Cito that's going too far ... footsteps made an EXCELLENT point: 1/4 of the players drafted rounds 1-4 were D-linemen. Maybe Nolan didn't see many he liked, but alotta other teams did. Which means our opinions in here are absolutely validated. Maybe not by the Broncos, but by numerous other teams.

Infact, that's not even an opinion.... that's actually fact. Numbers don't lie, and teams don't draft by throwing darts.

Dre was owed a deferred payment from 2007 or 2008 I believe. It wasn't a cap issue because as per the rules it has to count in that year it's on the books, but teams can move cash back and Denver did then until this season. Approx $3m I believe and Dan Graham had a $2m payment due. So technically McDaniels' cash budget for 2009 was already down $5m before he even started so he re-couped some of that by cutting Dre and saving his $3.25m base salary and $400k workout bonus.

eddie mac
06-28-2009, 03:23 PM
Goodman isn't much if any better..............Sorry I had to spell that out for you ;)

How much have you seen of Goodman to date considering last season was his best ever in the NFL and he made Marshall look like a bitch in Denver???

eddie mac
06-28-2009, 03:27 PM
I don't care if people are positive on the draft...we should be in June. But I object to being told I and everyone else who doesn't drink the koolaid yet is an idiot. This FO has lots to prove...they've done nothing to earn credibility until we see these guys on the field and they're hardly exempt from criticism, let alone should that be interpreted as stupidity.

I agree with that but there's a flipside to that coin as well. Let's give the man a chance to prove himself on the field as so many have crucified him so far for what he has done, or not done off the field.

Br0nc0Buster
06-28-2009, 03:31 PM
I don't see how our RB position was old, Torain and Hillis are both 2nd year players, Young and Hall are what, 3rd or 4th year players? How about TE, Graham is a team captain and not apparently going anywhere, Scheffler is a 4th year player not even out of his rookie contract, how many more TEs do we need?

Debating who is the better player in the draft is like debating which color is superior, green or blue. We can all come up with oppinion, but 99% of it is going to be pure nonsense.

My argument is this: you should always try to improve the team as much as possible. Do you do that by drafting the best player, or the player who is the biggest upgrade over the current stock of players?

I will say you do it through the latter option, if you have Peyton Manning as your QB, you don't draft a QB in the 1st round even though he is the concensus best player available, because he won't improve your team. If you have a defensive line full of rejects who have never been good enough to win a starting spot or even a key backup spot, it stands to reason that any player you can get high in the draft has a strong likelyhood of improving the overall talent of that position by a lot. I don't see how Mcbath is a big step up from what we have at FS or how Quinn is a big step up from Scheffler and Graham. I don't see how Smith is a huge step up for CBs.

Moreno seems like a good pick, he clearly upgrades the talent we at RB. Ayers is debatable, he clearly has some talent, but his lack of playing time in college doesn't bode well, and neither does the fact he is being switched to a new position. I think we could have improved the team more by adding talent and size to the DL rather than by getting backups.

You do it by best player, because even if we upgraded our d line, that isnt saying much as they were terrible last year. You could upgrade our line and it could still be only average.

Again you are settling for lesser talent out of need. That may give you a more immediate impact, but years down the road your needs may change, all of a sudden the guy you passed up for a NT may fill a need. Maybe after Champ gets old CB will be a huge need, and instead of Smith, you would have a lesser player at tackle but a huge void at corner.

This is assuming Smith is the better player, as our staff believes.

FA is where you get bodies, the draft is where you should have a chance to get elite players

Br0nc0Buster
06-28-2009, 03:39 PM
Exactly, Sam Adams proved that if you are sitting around in FA and not getting offers you are probably not very good, which is why I am not happy that our starting defensive line all sat around and got no offers in FA. All 3 players were FA scrubs. Yet somehow people think they are going to be better than Sam Adams who undeniably had talent and had performed at a very high level previously.

If we are riding it out, why did we trade away a 1st round pick for a 2nd round pick? if we are riding it out we should hang on to our own picks as much as possible and not trade away resources. The riding it out argument clashes with the fact that we gave up a 1st and 5th round pick next year to add talent this year.

Your Chiefs argument is entirely wrong. The Chiefs failed under Edwards because Vermeil and Peterson traded away all their assets and young players to try to get to the super bowl, when they failed and Vermeil was sent out of town, Edwards took over the oldest team (by some margin) in the league, that was completely devoid of young talent and had a lot of key players leave in short order or get injured. Where the Chiefs failed was in not replacing the players who left with players of similar talent, too many positions were filled with players of less talent.

We went 8-8 last year on the back of a franchise record passing offense, the head coach, offensive coordinator, QB coach and QB from that team are all gone. Even if we see some improvement on defense, and we will, it is going to be a big stretch to make up for that loss on offense.

we are riding out the bad dline to get talented players elsewhere.
I didnt really care for his trade ups, but he did it because he thought the players were that good.
I have seen almost every Chief game the last 5 years, you are naive if you dont think Herm's outdated run run pass punt offense had anything to do with their inability to score.
I already admitted they had less talent, but not that much less.
Herm failed to restock talent wise on offense, but he is the one who ruined Larry Johnson, and his predictible game planning is what got all his qbs hurt.

Talent wise on offense we lost Cutler, but gained Moreno.
So not as talented, but still damn talented.

As far as our coordinators and Shanny, our redzone offense was not good.
It can be improved.
McDaniels is supposed to be a wiz kid with offense anyways, afterall he was the coordinator of arguably the greatest offense ever.
Not sure if we can replicate last years offensive success, but its hardly impossible to match

footstepsfrom#27
06-28-2009, 03:40 PM
Packers | Raji working exclusively at defensive end

Sat, 27 Jun 2009 05:22:24 -0700

Kevin Seifert, of ESPN.com, reports Green Bay Packers DL B.J. Raji worked exclusively at defensive end during practice this week.
"This week"....OK...but earlier I've read he was working at NT and they liked what they saw...perhaps he's working to learn both spots?
I've noticed. ;D
You noticed what? Do you actually think I do not understand what you're saying? Really? That's what you really believe?

footstepsfrom#27
06-28-2009, 03:47 PM
I agree with that but there's a flipside to that coin as well. Let's give the man a chance to prove himself on the field as so many have crucified him so far for what he has done, or not done off the field.
Sure...I'm fine with that, and in fact I think that's how it should be. But you have to admit that it's an utterly unreasonable expectation that when you have a rookie coach, rookie front office, and a team that just took some incredibly unusual steps...straight out of the box...that a significant number of fans won't be disturbed by those actions. Does anyone really think these kinds of actions would not engender major questions?

It's been several weeks since I've been on the offensive with this stuff, yet I still get people acting like every post I put up here is bagging on the coach...in fact most of this board that was previously talking about these issues has been decidedly quieter on these issues. In spite of this...we're still getting people who virtually every other post is another attack, some other smart ass remark, etc...maybe at some point a few folks will open their eyes, look around and ask, "Who is actually talking about this now? Look closely....most of the current discussion is being provoked by the pro-McDaniels group simply refusing to leave it alone.

I stated on another thread...I'm so tired of the same discussion I no longer even care. I'm willing to bet a lot of others also feel that way.

chrisp
06-28-2009, 03:47 PM
Here's my thoughts on the whole D-line issue;

1) News-flash: contrary to popular belief, the D-line was NOT actually the Worst part of the defense. The gaping hole was in the secondary, specifically the safeties. After that the linebacker play was patchy at best. The D-line failed to generate a pass-rush, but apart from that was not too bad and was able to make key short-yardage stops in certain situations.

2) It should come as no surprise to see the guys pencilled in as the starters are the guys with the most experience in the 3-4 - that's just saying to the 4-3 holdovers "this is what you have to do" - master the system first. Doesn't mean those guys will be the starters on opening day - lets just see how camp goes - we have young guys who should be able to adjust to new systems and challenge for a starting job once the pads go on. Far to early to worry.

3) Exceptional D-line talent will always be welcome on any team, regardless of system, but it must be said that one of the key differences between 4-3 and 3-4 is that the latter does not demand playmakers on the d-line to the same extent as 4-3. Specifically in relation to the pass rush, the main responsibility for that definitely shifts from the d-line to the linebackers. So you could in fact argue that it less problematic to have a slightly - ahem - pedestrian D-line if you move to a 3-4 than it is on a 4-3.

4) Everybody seems to accept as gospel the suggestion that we're moving to a true full-blooded 2-gap 3-4 system, whereas in fact all of the statements from the coaching staff so far tend to indicate that we are looking at more of a hybrid 3-4/4-3 setup, particularly during the transition period, so the idea that we're forcing on people a system that they aren't best-suited for isn;t necesarily fair - I think you'll see a variety of looks out there....

gyldenlove
06-28-2009, 04:07 PM
You do it by best player, because even if we upgraded our d line, that isnt saying much as they were terrible last year. You could upgrade our line and it could still be only average.

Again you are settling for lesser talent out of need. That may give you a more immediate impact, but years down the road your needs may change, all of a sudden the guy you passed up for a NT may fill a need. Maybe after Champ gets old CB will be a huge need, and instead of Smith, you would have a lesser player at tackle but a huge void at corner.

This is assuming Smith is the better player, as our staff believes.

FA is where you get bodies, the draft is where you should have a chance to get elite players

The difference in talent between a player drafted number 20 and number 40 is negligible.

You can say best player until you are blue in the face, but fact is that you get the biggest improvement by drafting a player on the position you are the weakest.

By drafting players who can fill in your weak spots, you minimize the team weaknesses and that will allow you to play to your strengths. As it stands now our defensive line will get abused and we will have to commit extra help to achieve an acceptable level of pass rush and run stuffing, leaving the short passes wide open as they were last year. If we didn't have to support the defensive line with extra players we would have more players available to attack the opponent and limit their ways of gaining yards and scoring points.

eddie mac
06-28-2009, 04:21 PM
Sure...I'm fine with that, and in fact I think that's how it should be. But you have to admit that it's an utterly unreasonable expectation that when you have a rookie coach, rookie front office, and a team that just took some incredibly unusual steps...straight out of the box...that a significant number of fans won't be disturbed by those actions. Does anyone really think these kinds of actions would not engender major questions?

It's been several weeks since I've been on the offensive with this stuff, yet I still get people acting like every post I put up here is bagging on the coach...in fact most of this board that was previously talking about these issues has been decidedly quieter on these issues. In spite of this...we're still getting people who virtually every other post is another attack, some other smart ass remark, etc...maybe at some point a few folks will open their eyes, look around and ask, "Who is actually talking about this now? Look closely....most of the current discussion is being provoked by the pro-McDaniels group simply refusing to leave it alone.

I stated on another thread...I'm so tired of the same discussion I no longer even care. I'm willing to bet a lot of others also feel that way.

I'm the same 27. I'm on switch off mode now until we hit the field. How that turns out will determine my responses from hereon out and if anyone knows me, I can be a right **** after a bad game and I will call out players/coaches.

Br0nc0Buster
06-28-2009, 04:28 PM
The difference in talent between a player drafted number 20 and number 40 is negligible.

You can say best player until you are blue in the face, but fact is that you get the biggest improvement by drafting a player on the position you are the weakest.

By drafting players who can fill in your weak spots, you minimize the team weaknesses and that will allow you to play to your strengths. As it stands now our defensive line will get abused and we will have to commit extra help to achieve an acceptable level of pass rush and run stuffing, leaving the short passes wide open as they were last year. If we didn't have to support the defensive line with extra players we would have more players available to attack the opponent and limit their ways of gaining yards and scoring points.

yes short term this is the best way to be competitive, address your biggest weakness.
But long term I think acquiring the best talent will pay off because they will be able to play at a level the guys brought in for needs are not able to

cmhargrove
06-28-2009, 04:41 PM
The difference in talent between a player drafted number 20 and number 40 is negligible.

You can say best player until you are blue in the face, but fact is that you get the biggest improvement by drafting a player on the position you are the weakest.

By drafting players who can fill in your weak spots, you minimize the team weaknesses and that will allow you to play to your strengths. As it stands now our defensive line will get abused and we will have to commit extra help to achieve an acceptable level of pass rush and run stuffing, leaving the short passes wide open as they were last year. If we didn't have to support the defensive line with extra players we would have more players available to attack the opponent and limit their ways of gaining yards and scoring points.

If I remember correctly, we are now physically larger at every single position on the front seven. Dj will be the "smallest" player on the front seven at 240. I think you might be surprised how stout we actually look. The problem is not size/strength, but experience. When a defense gets "fooled," they can give up big plays, but I don't thinkw we will get pushed around like you think.

Follow that up with a talented, physical secondary and once again, you might be a little surprised. It might be wise to reserve judgement for the preseason.

BroncoBuff
06-28-2009, 04:42 PM
Exactly, Sam Adams proved that if you are sitting around in FA and not getting offers you are probably not very good.They're different people, different situations. Besides, Grady was signed by Detroit. He's old as the hills, and has bounced all over the league, but no doubt he's a very competent NT plugger. It'd be nice to rent him a couple years ...

BroncoMan4ever
06-28-2009, 04:50 PM
I'm concerned we're going into the season weak, weak, weak there (yet again).

We drafted just one D-lineman - and that guy is a LB now. The standard response from pro-Josh guys is that there was a dearth of talent in the draft ... but the facts disagree:

7 d-linemen drafted in Round 1
7 d-linemen drafted in Round 2
7 d-linemen drafted in Round 3
10 d-linemen drafted in Round 4


Obviously there were plenty of D-linemen out there ... in fact, 31 drafted in the first 135 picks shows D-linemen were actually OVER-represented in this draft.

factor in that more than likely out of the 31 in the 1st 4 rounds, maybe 5 of them were guys who seemed like they could make an impact in the 3-4 and subtract the 2 that were taken top 10 and it becomes more understandable as to why we didn't get more than Ayers.

also, just because a guy plays a position of need, doesn't mean a team should reach on him for that reason alone. that is why we have Moss and Crowder on the roster to sit on the bench or be gameday inactives.

BroncoBuff
06-28-2009, 04:53 PM
Dre was owed a deferred payment from 2007 or 2008 I believe. It wasn't a cap issue because as per the rules it has to count in that year it's on the books, but teams can move cash back and Denver did then until this season. Approx $3m I believe and Dan Graham had a $2m payment due. So technically McDaniels' cash budget for 2009 was already down $5m before he even started so he re-couped some of that by cutting Dre and saving his $3.25m base salary and $400k workout bonus.

Wait, so we saved $3.6 mil cutting Bly? I could've sworn I heard we'd pay him the same either way ... maybe the deferred salary was the reasoning, or maybe the cap hit was the same either way ???

BroncoBuff
06-28-2009, 05:02 PM
2004 Packers With Grady Jackson

Situation Yd/Play DVOA % DVOA Rank
Vs. Pass 4.96 -21.6 5
Vs. Rush 3.96 -27.3 2
22. Grady Jackson: Halfway through the 2003 season, the New Orleans Saints suspended Jackson for "conduct detrimental to the team" and then released him. Green Bay picked him up off waivers.

He hasn't been quite that important over the last couple years, but there's no doubt the guy makes an impact.

- ESPN 25 Most underrated players

DenverBrit
06-28-2009, 05:12 PM
You noticed what? Do you actually think I do not understand what you're saying? Really? That's what you really believe?

I've noticed that no matter how many times I, or others, try and make a point, some will still say:

"So you're saying....."

........and come up with something obviously different or opposite.....either because they don't understand, or they are deliberately being obtuse and argumentative.

It's the internet.

oubronco
06-28-2009, 05:24 PM
How much have you seen of Goodman to date considering last season was his best ever in the NFL and he made Marshall look like a b**** in Denver???

on a bum hip no less

footstepsfrom#27
06-28-2009, 05:27 PM
I've noticed that no matter how many times I, or others, try and make a point, some will still say:

"So you're saying....."

........and come up with something obviously different or opposite.....either because they don't understand, or they are deliberately being obtuse and argumentative.
Except that's not what happened here, and it's obvious it's not. The statement I responded to had to do with drafting players as backups or reaching for them...and the response I chose was a clear cut answer to this suggestion, nothing more.

We need to get beyond all this constant bickering over the same topics...how exactly is that going to happen when even posts that have absolutely NOTHING to do with any of the hot buttons...McDaniels, Cutler, Marshall...are laced constantly with references to this?

Cripes...this stuff is BORING now...is it not? Think about it...how many times can the same exact discussions be trotted out and garner exactly the same responses before this gets FREAKING OLD?

DenverBrit
06-28-2009, 05:41 PM
Except that's not what happened here, and it's obvious it's not. The statement I responded to had to do with drafting players as backups or reaching for them...and the response I chose was a clear cut answer to this suggestion, nothing more.

We need to get beyond all this constant bickering over the same topics...how exactly is that going to happen when even posts that have absolutely NOTHING to do with any of the hot buttons...McDaniels, Cutler, Marshall...are laced constantly with references to this?

Cripes...this stuff is BORING now...is it not? Think about it...how many times can the same exact discussions be trotted out and garner exactly the same responses before this gets FREAKING OLD?

I completely agree. Training camp can't get here fast enough.

eddie mac
06-28-2009, 06:04 PM
Wait, so we saved $3.6 mil cutting Bly? I could've sworn I heard we'd pay him the same either way ... maybe the deferred salary was the reasoning, or maybe the cap hit was the same either way ???

We saved $3.6m in cash. Either way Bly was getting that $3m cash payment this season anyway cos we owed him it from a deferred payment when he signed his bumper contract.

The cap hit was a $1m or so more after he was cut due to the accelerating signing bonus. So in terms of cash we saved money this year but in terms of cap we were down an additional $1m plus but the cash is and was far more important given the huge cap this year.

eddie mac
06-28-2009, 06:05 PM
on a bum hip no less

He seemed to do fine against other CB's last year. Did he not get to the Pro-Bowl afterall???

eddie mac
06-28-2009, 06:06 PM
- ESPN 25 Most underrated players

Yeah and they were specific about the year. He's done **** all since then and cant even get on the field in Detroit yet.LOL

_Oro_
06-28-2009, 07:22 PM
Goodman isn't much if any better..............Sorry I had to spell that out for you ;)

That's exactly the point?

DarkHorse30
06-28-2009, 08:41 PM
Sure...I'm fine with that, and in fact I think that's how it should be. But you have to admit that it's an utterly unreasonable expectation that when you have a rookie coach, rookie front office, and a team that just took some incredibly unusual steps...straight out of the box...that a significant number of fans won't be disturbed by those actions. Does anyone really think these kinds of actions would not engender major questions?



How about this.....is it an "unreasonable expectation" this year to have hoped for a playoff APPEARANCE if Shanahan and Cutler had stayed?

Why do you suppose that is?

If you honestly don't think that the Broncos had to rebuild from the ground up...after last year's MAJOR CHOKE by Shanahan and his crew (including Cutler-aka-the magical disappearing probowl QB)....you are high.

You may not like McDaniels, but keeping Shanahan and Quitler for another year would likely have been a complete disaster. The way it turned out, Bowlen got the most value for Cutler that he could have gotten, and a proven OC and a proven DC.....and a ton of new talent. If you want to keep crying about Shanahan, you are pissing in the wind.

footstepsfrom#27
06-28-2009, 09:58 PM
How about this.....is it an "unreasonable expectation" this year to have hoped for a playoff APPEARANCE if Shanahan and Cutler had stayed?

Why do you suppose that is?

If you honestly don't think that the Broncos had to rebuild from the ground up...after last year's MAJOR CHOKE by Shanahan and his crew (including Cutler-aka-the magical disappearing probowl QB)....you are high.
You must be confusing me with someone who wanted Shanahan to stay.

Having said that...this offense and it's QB with a mere 37 games under the belt of it's highly talented QB was not the problem that needed fixing. I've documented on here before...even Peyton Manning did not win with a bad defense, and the one he played with was better than the crap we rolled out last year.
You may not like McDaniels, but keeping Shanahan and Quitler for another year would likely have been a complete disaster. The way it turned out, Bowlen got the most value for Cutler that he could have gotten, and a proven OC and a proven DC.....and a ton of new talent. If you want to keep crying about Shanahan, you are pissing in the wind.
You're the one pissing in the wind, because you don't even know what I've posted in here in the past or you wouldn't be lumping me in with people who wanted Shanny to stay. There was no reason to jettison Cutler along with Shanahan however...tell ya what...let's keep stating and restating and arguing and bickering back and forth about this for the next few thousand posts shall we? You can continue yammering your opinion with every other post hating on Cutler and the other side will keep responding back...let's do this all day OK? That's been proven to change minds and get people thinking differently than they've thought for the last 4 months won't it? Dozens of posters have come over to the opposite side haven't they? Assume for a minute they actually would...what exactly would you gain from it?

This **** is meanignless and I'm not playing this game anymore.

SoCalBronco
06-28-2009, 10:01 PM
This **** is meanignless and I'm not playing this game anymore.

Come on, dude. I need your help, Footsteps. I can take on only so many "But...but....this is just like buying a TV from Best Buy" homers at a time.
;D

http://briansullivan.blogs.foxbusiness.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/16/files//2008/12/best-buy.jpg

footstepsfrom#27
06-28-2009, 10:03 PM
Come on, dude. I need your help, Footsteps. I can take on only so many "But...but....this is just like buying a TV from Best Buy" homers at a time.
;D
Yeah that was a pretty funny line...I forgot...who said it?

SoCalBronco
06-28-2009, 10:05 PM
Yeah that was a pretty funny line...I forgot...who said it?

I think it was Doggcow but I don't remember for sure. That was a classic, though.

footstepsfrom#27
06-28-2009, 10:09 PM
I think it was Doggcow but I don't remember for sure. That was a classic, though.
Yep...rivals Bob's statement about the long history of 3-4 DE's... :thumbs:

Broncos_OTM
06-29-2009, 12:55 AM
Joe Pa thought he needed a new start...it's been stated several times now and discussed at length before this so I don't know why this is getting missed. He might be a bargan or he might be a head case...time will tell.

i am well aware of this. i never claimed he was the next wilfokrk. So i am confused did i comment in the chris baker thread?n or am i not allowed to talk about him... because if some of us want to discuss it i have no problem...

footstepsfrom#27
06-29-2009, 05:59 AM
i am well aware of this. i never claimed he was the next wilfokrk. So i am confused did i comment in the chris baker thread?n or am i not allowed to talk about him... because if some of us want to discuss it i have no problem...
Fair enough...I thought you were saying that he made the choice to leave on his own so I was pointing out that he was booted out.

Mediator12
06-29-2009, 06:31 AM
What is completely being missed here is the TURNOVER of defenses in the NFL this offseason. BroncoBuff states that 1/4 of the first 4 rounds were DL. Well, couple that with 19 new DC's and over half the defenses in the league have changed Philiosphies if not out right scheme's.

Since you build a defense from the middle of the front back, it stands to reason that a whole bunch of teams would draft DL that fit their new Systems, despite them being a bunch of developmental prospects for the most part. There are at least 12 teams that are completely overhauling their defense, including 5 teams switching from 4-3, 3-4, or multiple fronts. That stands to reason that the teams who are moving to systems where their current crop of DL do not fit what they do would try and get new players right?

Enter the draft, with a really poor crop of non-NFL ready players. That is why this draft was poor for DL, there is always some raw talent out there, but there were very few guys who could come in and compete to play without a lot of development. In fact, I think all the DE's, outside of Tyson Jackson, would have needed time to play, and only Raji and Peria Jerry were going to compete to play right away at DT. BTW, Brian Orakpo is playing SAM in a 4-3 for WAS instead of Pure DE......

Mediator12
06-29-2009, 06:35 AM
Here is the link to all the NEW DC's and the possible Scheme Changes:

http://profootballweekly.com/2009/06/09/browns-ryan-saints-williams-among-defensive-coordi

Rock Chalk
06-29-2009, 06:45 AM
And that absolves Denver how?

The sheer fact that New England thinks Brace can replace Wilfork is convincing enough that he was worth taking over a nickel.

And what's wrong with drafting a 5 tech in the first round? A dominant 3-4 DE makes everyone else look a lot better. Richard Seymour, Darnell Dockett, the mexican guy that popped for roids precombine in SD.

LOL Rev

You seem to think NE can do no wrong in their drafts.

Check again.

Mediator12
06-29-2009, 06:57 AM
LOL Rev

You seem to think NE can do no wrong in their drafts.

Check again.

That's certainly true, but they have been one of the best, if not the best at drafting Lineman on BOTH sides of the ball in the Belichick/Pioli Era. They have truly struggled to get DB's and Offensive skill players. Randy Moss, Wes Welker, Corey Dillon, were all trades. However, they have sent over half their current Lines to the Probowl...

BroncoSojia
06-29-2009, 07:05 AM
I think he could be ok but he has never really played well other then last year. Bly will out play him in San Fran.

Yeah, we overpaid horribly for Goodman. We could've signed Ron Bartell, who is bigger, faster, younger, and better than him for around the same price.


Another awesome move by the FO.

Mediator12
06-29-2009, 07:11 AM
Yeah, we overpaid horribly for Goodman. We could've signed Ron Bartell, who is bigger, faster, younger, and better than him for around the same price.


Another awesome move by the FO.

Except the fact that Bartells numbers in STL were MUCH WORSE than Goodman's the last 2 years. He averaged 2 whole YPA's and 2.5 SYPA less than Goodman. Sounds like a real bargain. Especially when Bartell was almost dead last in those categories 2 years ago.

TheReverend
06-29-2009, 08:13 AM
LOL Rev

You seem to think NE can do no wrong in their drafts.

Check again.

I never once said that, Alec. Read it again. VERY Slowly. So it's on the same level as you. :)

Now, notice how I said they feel they can replace someone like Wilfork with Brace. Wilfork is one of the best. Easy. And his pay day next season will show it.

If they think they could replace Wilfork with Brace, I think we could've managed to replace Ronald Fields with him... don't you?

And that was the point.

NE hasn't been all stars at drafting recently, but I'd trust their FO a LOT more than the headscratching decisions recently performed by McD and Xanders.

Don't forget, Xanders was a cap man and McDaniels was quick to praise him for "putting together their entire draft"... and only had 100 guys on their board and did a bunch of draft day dumb ****.

DarkHorse30
06-29-2009, 10:11 AM
...even Peyton Manning did not win with a bad defense, and the one he played with was better than the crap we rolled out last year.

comparing Cutler to Manning is ludicrous. Why not compare him to every all-pro ever, based on having a strong arm. You realize he has more in common with Jeff George than Peyton Manning, right?

There was no reason to jettison Cutler along with Shanahan however

one big reason.....Cutler quit. How do you keep a "leader" who doesn't know how to lead? Cutler had 3 years in a good offense and didn't make the playoffs AND was consistently beat up by his biggest rival (SD). Maybe McDaniels could have helped him get over the hump, but Cutler made his own decision, by railroading himself and his agent right out of town. I won't make excuses for an idiot, and a QB that gets himself traded to one of the worst offenses in the league is a supreme idiot.

BroncoBuff
06-29-2009, 10:38 AM
one big reason.....Cutler quit.

No he didn't. Why do people have to keep stating this falsehood?

Cutler said he would show up for all mandatory functions. Period.

At least we should get the facts straight.

24champ
06-29-2009, 10:45 AM
Don't forget, Xanders was a cap man and McDaniels was quick to praise him for "putting together their entire draft"...

Mcdaniels was referring to Xanders getting the party tray from Costco, and also ordering pizza for everyone in the room...Xanders also made a couple runs to Chipotle on the second day, as well as getting coffee for the guys in the war room...so yeah he put together the draft quite well for everyone else in the war room.

BroncoBuff
06-29-2009, 10:48 AM
Bowlen traded him, fine. I'm ready to move on, I have moved on. But answering phone calls - even from the owner - is not mandatory under NFL player contracts. Bowlen has every right to get angry and trade him, and he did, fine.

But the fact is: Cutler publicly stated he would attend all mandatory functions. I think Jay was a whiny b**** and I don't blame Bowlen one bit for offing him, but Jay said he would show up at mini-camp.

If you really wanna nail Jay, the best ammo you have is that he was outta town, in Florida and Nashville, and he didn't even have his playbook with him. A complicated new offense, and he left the thing at home. His father dropped it off at Dove Valley the morning after the trade. Jay shouldda had it with him to study, even if just for 20-30 minutes before he crashed every night.

BroncoBuff
06-29-2009, 10:51 AM
Ahhh, that post of mine was BS .... Jay did quit. Leaving the playbook at home is the same as quitting.

Splitting hairs to defend the whiny beeyach make no sense there Buff....

BroncoBuff
06-29-2009, 10:52 AM
Splitting hairs to defend the whiny beeyach make no sense there Buff....

Fair enough, I'll stop doing that.

gyldenlove
06-29-2009, 10:52 AM
If I remember correctly, we are now physically larger at every single position on the front seven. Dj will be the "smallest" player on the front seven at 240. I think you might be surprised how stout we actually look. The problem is not size/strength, but experience. When a defense gets "fooled," they can give up big plays, but I don't thinkw we will get pushed around like you think.

Follow that up with a talented, physical secondary and once again, you might be a little surprised. It might be wise to reserve judgement for the preseason.

If being big is so great then why did Sam Adams suck so badly, he was clearly a lardass.

We could field 3 500lb guys out there, but it wouldn't make us any better. You need skill, athleticism, talent and size all together, having 1 of the 4 is nowhere near enough.

I think we will get pushed around quite a bit, even though we have gotten bigger we are still no bigger than the offensive line and there 5 of them and only 3 of our guys. Not only that but the defensive linemen we are fielding must be lacking something or they would probably be in higher demand than they were, so I am guessing we are going to be short on quickness and instincts and anchoring strength.

I am not judging anything, I am predicing, there is a HUGE difference.

BroncoBuff
06-29-2009, 10:56 AM
If I remember correctly, we are now physically larger at every single position on the front seven.

Definitely. I've said it before ... whichever two of Dumervil and/or Reid and/or Ayers will be the largest pair of OLBs in NFL history.

DarkHorse30
06-29-2009, 11:13 AM
No he didn't. Why do people have to keep stating this falsehood?

Cutler said he would show up for all mandatory functions. Period.

At least we should get the facts straight.

Saying you want to be traded....but will show up for mandatory functions, is quitting.

You can dress up his actions any way you want, but Denver did what it had to do given the situation that Cutler put them in. When your "leader" isn't buying into what your owner wants to do, and says he wants to leave, then you either

a) convince him to stay and belly up

or

b) get the most value out of him that you can, while moving him.

Given the fact that Cutler would not return his owners phonecalls, what option was there?

I'm angry that Cutler quit. He was supposed to be Denver's franchise QB. After 2 years he seemed to be growing into his role. Sure he had some problems, but maybe A NEW COACH (that has some experience coaching up QBs) could help him. IMO, Cutler threw his fans, his teammates and his opportunity to help his team all down the toilet, by quitting. I'm not sure how anybody could view this otherwise.

BroncoBuff
06-29-2009, 11:18 AM
Saying you want to be traded....but will show up for mandatory functions, is quitting.

You can dress up his actions any way you want, but Denver did what it had to do given the situation that Cutler put them in. When your "leader" isn't buying into what your owner wants to do, and says he wants to leave, then you either

a) convince him to stay and belly up

or

b) get the most value out of him that you can, while moving him.

Given the fact that Cutler would not return his owners phonecalls, what option was there?

I GIVE UP ... YOU WIN! :(

(see 5 posts above)

Rock Chalk
08-10-2009, 07:06 PM
I never once said that, Alec. Read it again. VERY Slowly. So it's on the same level as you. :)

Now, notice how I said they feel they can replace someone like Wilfork with Brace. Wilfork is one of the best. Easy. And his pay day next season will show it.

If they think they could replace Wilfork with Brace, I think we could've managed to replace Ronald Fields with him... don't you?

And that was the point.

NE hasn't been all stars at drafting recently, but I'd trust their FO a LOT more than the headscratching decisions recently performed by McD and Xanders.

Don't forget, Xanders was a cap man and McDaniels was quick to praise him for "putting together their entire draft"... and only had 100 guys on their board and did a bunch of draft day dumb ****.

Sorry Im late to respond to this. I get sidetracked by actual work most of the time I post here so my unintended grenade didnt have the follow supressing fire I wanted to add.

Anyway, I just really want to respond to your last paragraph. How do you know what we did on draft day was dumb ****? Seriously, how do you know that? Cuz, Im kinda thinking that maybe we should wait and see how these guys perform on the field before we go half cocked thinking it was entirely dumb ****.

Moreno was the best back in the draft. Ayers was the "best defensive player" in the draft (Mike Mayock's words, not mine). Smith was the "best cornerback" in the draft (Again, Mayocks words, not mine).

So with our first three draft picks we got the 1 RB, the 1 CB and arguably the 1 DE/OLB in the draft according to Mike Mayock. Now given all the praise Mayock has received for his own praising of our past excellent drafts (the Cutler draft, the Clady draft, etc), I would assume the guy kinda knows what he is talking about and since we got 3 players considered by him to be the best at their position in the draft, what exactly was dumb ****?

The Quinn pic? OK make that argument. I could argue it but I wont because I dont like the quinn pick. Pretty happy about the draft though in hindsight but that doesnt make me right. Afterall I have no idea how these guys are going to pan out in the future. If Moreno breaks his leg this Friday, and can never walk again, well that kinda makes the Moreno pick a bad pick doesnt it? But if he goes on to have an 1800 yard season this year, well then McD and X are ****ing genius' right?

All Im saying is, give the guys some time to prove themselves. Just because we dont like a draft doesnt mean we are right about it. Doesnt mean we are wrong either but like everyone else on teh planet including X and McD, we have to wait and see. Its our only LOGICAL option.

footstepsfrom#27
08-10-2009, 07:30 PM
Marcus Thomas will start he fits one gap really well ! he has the burst that will get him 8 to 12 sacks this season even at NT .
I don't think any NT in memory has had 8-12 sacks. 2 or 3 would be fine at that position. Even if he starts at DE, his job won't be to get the QB...he might have 5 sacks if he starts...emphasis on "might".

I look at the best talent on this line being Thomas, Powell and Baker, but I doubt that winds up being the starting group...at least in the early going.

TheReverend
08-10-2009, 07:35 PM
Sorry Im late to respond to this. I get sidetracked by actual work most of the time I post here so my unintended grenade didnt have the follow supressing fire I wanted to add.

Anyway, I just really want to respond to your last paragraph. How do you know what we did on draft day was dumb ****? Seriously, how do you know that? Cuz, Im kinda thinking that maybe we should wait and see how these guys perform on the field before we go half cocked thinking it was entirely dumb ****.

Moreno was the best back in the draft. Ayers was the "best defensive player" in the draft (Mike Mayock's words, not mine). Smith was the "best cornerback" in the draft (Again, Mayocks words, not mine).

So with our first three draft picks we got the 1 RB, the 1 CB and arguably the 1 DE/OLB in the draft according to Mike Mayock. Now given all the praise Mayock has received for his own praising of our past excellent drafts (the Cutler draft, the Clady draft, etc), I would assume the guy kinda knows what he is talking about and since we got 3 players considered by him to be the best at their position in the draft, what exactly was dumb ****?

The Quinn pic? OK make that argument. I could argue it but I wont because I dont like the quinn pick. Pretty happy about the draft though in hindsight but that doesnt make me right. Afterall I have no idea how these guys are going to pan out in the future. If Moreno breaks his leg this Friday, and can never walk again, well that kinda makes the Moreno pick a bad pick doesnt it? But if he goes on to have an 1800 yard season this year, well then McD and X are ****ing genius' right?

All Im saying is, give the guys some time to prove themselves. Just because we dont like a draft doesnt mean we are right about it. Doesnt mean we are wrong either but like everyone else on teh planet including X and McD, we have to wait and see. Its our only LOGICAL option.

Moreno is an extremely understandable pick after trading Cutler, so that bothers me not at all.

As far as Ayers goes, I'm pretty sure I was his first OM fan and supporter.

The dumb **** that happened on draft day is sheer value loss.

Pick 37 (Smith) is worth roughly 550 points. Next years first is anywhere from 3000-700. So, if we win the superbowl, we choke 150 points of value, a mid third round pick.

Now that's without taking into consideration the relative weakness of this years draft, especially compared to next season when a parade of studs (especially on defense with Spikes, Cody, Mays and many more) come out.

The Quinn trade is my other point of frustration, but you already said you don't like it and not to bring it up, so we'll leave that alone.

Anyways, the point remains, Alphonso will not only have to be good, he'll have to be GREAT and pretty much be a career COG on the defense and match-up to a star defender that comes out next year in the area where we would be picking. Those odds are very slim. It wasn't smart. It was impulsive.

footstepsfrom#27
08-10-2009, 07:36 PM
Originally Posted by footstepsfrom#27
...even Peyton Manning did not win with a bad defense, and the one he played with was better than the crap we rolled out last year.
comparing Cutler to Manning is ludicrous. Why not compare him to every all-pro ever, based on having a strong arm. You realize he has more in common with Jeff George than Peyton Manning, right?
What I realize based on that last absurd statement is that explaining to you why I did not "compare Cutler to Manning" based on this post would probably be a waste of time.

DarkHorse30
08-10-2009, 07:47 PM
Originally Posted by footstepsfrom#27
...even Peyton Manning did not win with a bad defense, and the one he played with was better than the crap we rolled out last year.

What I realize based on that last absurd statement is that explaining to you why I did not "compare Cutler to Manning" based on this post would probably be a waste of time.

Agreed. When Cutler does anything of measurable value, he'll get his cred. But not until he does. Thus far, he is a loser with a pissy tude.

TheReverend
08-10-2009, 07:48 PM
Agreed. When Cutler does anything of measurable value, he'll get his cred. But not until he does. Thus far, he is a loser with a pissy tude.

Well he's got the defense now, so you won't have to wait long...

footstepsfrom#27
08-10-2009, 07:52 PM
Agreed. When Cutler does anything of measurable value, he'll get his cred. But not until he does. Thus far, he is a loser with a pissy tude.
Cutler will get no credit here no matter what he does. This fan base will live to hate this guy for the rest of his career just like the Colts fans hate Elway to this day...a guy we embraced despite him shunning another team. Obviously it's not WHAT he does, but WHO he does it to in the minds of most fans.

ZONA
08-10-2009, 08:11 PM
Now that's without taking into consideration the relative weakness of this years draft, especially compared to next season when a parade of studs (especially on defense with Spikes, Cody, Mays and many more) come out.

[/U][/B]

I have to add something here. I don't know how many times I have heard (by alot of the NFL and ESPN guys that cover drafts) about the so called "this draft is weak but next years looks to be excellent". That always has a way of losing fizzle by the time that next draft comes. Alot of stuff can happen during the course of a college season. Some new names will start to pop up as guys have break out seasons and maybe excellent combines while others that were thought to be excellent prospects, fall down the lists, sometimes quite far.

So really, all a coach has to go on is who is in the CURRENT draft. You can't look ahead to the following draft. Too many things can happen, as I mentioned above regarding those players, but also a coach could get fired, draft position, things of that sort.

DarkHorse30
08-10-2009, 08:26 PM
Cutler will get no credit here no matter what he does. This fan base will live to hate this guy for the rest of his career just like the Colts fans hate Elway to this day...a guy we embraced despite him shunning another team. Obviously it's not WHAT he does, but WHO he does it to in the minds of most fans.

Now you are comparing him to Elway.....based on what?

Sure I'm pissed that he's a ninny....who wouldn't I be? Is it MY fault that he quit on Denver and ran home to mommy and daddy? Denver had a ton of time and materials invested in that slug and thank God Denver's owner got plenty in return for that investment.

Br0nc0Buster
08-10-2009, 09:03 PM
Moreno is an extremely understandable pick after trading Cutler, so that bothers me not at all.

As far as Ayers goes, I'm pretty sure I was his first OM fan and supporter.

The dumb **** that happened on draft day is sheer value loss.

Pick 37 (Smith) is worth roughly 550 points. Next years first is anywhere from 3000-700. So, if we win the superbowl, we choke 150 points of value, a mid third round pick.

Now that's without taking into consideration the relative weakness of this years draft, especially compared to next season when a parade of studs (especially on defense with Spikes, Cody, Mays and many more) come out.

The Quinn trade is my other point of frustration, but you already said you don't like it and not to bring it up, so we'll leave that alone.

Anyways, the point remains, Alphonso will not only have to be good, he'll have to be GREAT and pretty much be a career COG on the defense and match-up to a star defender that comes out next year in the area where we would be picking. Those odds are very slim. It wasn't smart. It was impulsive.

um no
1st round picks are worth anywhere from 3000 to 590 points
But you forgot to mention future picks are worth a round less than current picks
That is to say that you must trade a future 3rd to get a current 4th, future 4th to get a current 5th, and so on

We had 4 first rounders over the next 2 years and we decided to use 3 of them this year.
The point of the picks is to acquire players, higher value of the pick doesnt guarantee better player.

Eddie Royal outplayed his draft stock, so did Clady, Hillis, and Woodyard from last years class.
To suggest the odds of Smith outplaying his draft stock are "very slim" is ridiculous

TheReverend
08-10-2009, 09:20 PM
um no
1st round picks are worth anywhere from 3000 to 590 points
But you forgot to mention future picks are worth a round less than current picks
That is to say that you must trade a future 3rd to get a current 4th, future 4th to get a current 5th, and so on

We had 4 first rounders over the next 2 years and we decided to use 3 of them this year.
The point of the picks is to acquire players, higher value of the pick doesnt guarantee better player.

Eddie Royal outplayed his draft stock, so did Clady, Hillis, and Woodyard from last years class.
To suggest the odds of Smith outplaying his draft stock are "very slim" is ridiculous

1. if you're using the outdated JJ chart, sure
2. not true. future picks are somewhat devalued, but nowhere near as much as you're claiming
3. the rest of your post is similarly unvalid and has nothing to do with any of the points I've made.

Congratulations for butting into a discussion between Alec and I, and making completely inaccurate and/or unapplicable statements after

400HZ
08-10-2009, 09:34 PM
I don't think any NT in memory has had 8-12 sacks. 2 or 3 would be fine at that position. Even if he starts at DE, his job won't be to get the QB...he might have 5 sacks if he starts...emphasis on "might".

I look at the best talent on this line being Thomas, Powell and Baker, but I doubt that winds up being the starting group...at least in the early going.

Especially considering that Marcus Thomas' next sack will be his first. :rofl:

Br0nc0Buster
08-10-2009, 09:35 PM
1. if you're using the outdated JJ chart, sure
2. not true. future picks are somewhat devalued, but nowhere near as much as you're claiming
3. the rest of your post is similarly unvalid and has nothing to do with any of the points I've made.

Congratulations for butting into a discussion between Alec and I, and making completely inaccurate and/or unapplicable statements after

1. I have yet to see a draft value chart that has pick 32 worth 700 points, but that doesnt really deal with my main point anyways
2. The Panthers also traded their future first for a second rounder, so yes future picks are devalued quite a bit.
3. ok, I guess if you ignore my points its as if I didnt say them

On that note I will let you two have it to yourselves again

lex
08-10-2009, 09:44 PM
Especially considering that Marcus Thomas' next sack will be his first. :rofl:

But he has had an INT in each of his first two years...which is probably more than you can say for a lot of the back 7 guys.

BroncoMan4ever
08-10-2009, 10:33 PM
I have faith in Mike Nolan, I really do.

But any reasonable, objective appraisal of our current D-would be that it's a real mess. Our three starters in the 3-4 alignment:

Ryan McBean - has played in only one game ever, in 2007
Ron Fields has just 9 career starts ... all in 2006. ONE career sack in 4 seasons.
Kenny Peterson (although I've been his biggest supporter on the board), just 1 start in six seasons
That is not a confidence-inspiring trio, not by a long shot. I daresay Ekuban is better than any of the three (though albeit a graybeard now). "The market" has spoken on these three ... they're all castoffs.

And not a word outta Dove Valley this offseason about Marcus Thomas or Carlton Powell? That seems strange ... those three starters ahead of them ... is that a Shanahan player purge of some kind ???

that is how the Pats, Steelers and other elite teams are building their teams up. they are bringing in guys who have good attitudes, high work ethics, good team guys who may not have shown much in their career, but are brought in and become really good players for their team.

also, even with these guys, the defensive rebuild is nowhere near completed. next season is when we will know where we are weak and finish addressing those points on the defense. this season we will be improved but not a finished product.

worm
08-10-2009, 11:39 PM
they are bringing in guys who have good attitudes, high work ethics, good team guys who may not have shown much in their career, but are brought in and become really good players for their team.

Cool. That was the same reason John Engelberger was brought in.

ZONA
08-11-2009, 02:56 AM
future picks are worth a round less than current picks. That is to say that you must trade a future 3rd to get a current 4th, future 4th to get a current 5th, and so on



I would say that 99% of the people that didn't like this trade don't realize that or they just choose to ignore it for sake of their argument. The team who gave us that pick would not have traded for a 2nd round pick next year for a 2nd rounder this year. C'mon people, think.

Mediator12
08-11-2009, 06:47 AM
that is how the Pats, Steelers and other elite teams are building their teams up. they are bringing in guys who have good attitudes, high work ethics, good team guys who may not have shown much in their career, but are brought in and become really good players for their team.

also, even with these guys, the defensive rebuild is nowhere near completed. next season is when we will know where we are weak and finish addressing those points on the defense. this season we will be improved but not a finished product.

You need to be careful in making blanket statements about how teams build their teams. While in this case some of what you are saying is true, some of it is not really applicable with respect to the DL. Both those teams put a lot of draft resources into their front seven on defense.

Also, these are already top level teams in terms of defensive talent. All they really need in a lot of cases is excellent character role players in FA. They do not need elite level playuers in their front seven, because they have them already.....

Beantown Bronco
08-11-2009, 06:47 AM
that is how the Pats, Steelers and other elite teams are building their teams up. they are bringing in guys who have good attitudes, high work ethics, good team guys who may not have shown much in their career, but are brought in and become really good players for their team.

The Pats DLine have been exclusively 1st round picks that they've hit on, big time......not retreads that, while having "good attitudes and good work ethic, etc", haven't even been starters elsewhere.

TheReverend
08-11-2009, 08:32 AM
1. I have yet to see a draft value chart that has pick 32 worth 700 points, but that doesnt really deal with my main point anyways
2. The Panthers also traded their future first for a second rounder, so yes future picks are devalued quite a bit.
3. ok, I guess if you ignore my points its as if I didnt say them

On that note I will let you two have it to yourselves again

1. Then you obviously have never looked.
2. Yes they did... and they're also a far superior football team that will be picking later than Denver next season AND received a 4th round pick as well. Thank you for giving me another example of how inept the FO was in the Smith pick trade.

Black59Razor
08-11-2009, 08:50 AM
The Pats DLine have been exclusively 1st round picks that they've hit on, big time......not retreads that, while having "good attitudes and good work ethic, etc", haven't even been starters elsewhere.

Yet the Patriots defense wasn't that good last year. For as good as Seymour, Wilfork and Warren may look on paper, it hasn't translated to a dominant defense for the Patriots in some time, primarily because the Pats LB's have fallen off dramatically.

The key to any good 3-4 is the LB's.

The Chargers, Pats and Steelers all have massive NT's, but the Cowboys and Dolphins don't, but all have great LB's across the board.

Look at some of the d-linemen from some of these teams:

San Diego: Williams is a beast, and the best NT in the biz, but Luis Castillo is nothing special. Castillo is a good, solid player, but certainly not a dominant player. Their proposed starting RDE is Jacques Cesaire, who is roughly the equivalent of Kenny Peterson.

Pittsburgh: Hampton again is a great NT, and Aaron Smith is a very food LDE, but Bret Keisel starts at RDE, and he is nothing to write home about...and look at the Steelers depth; they really don't have much to speak of, so if they suffer significant injuries, they will fall off significantly.

Dallas: NT Jay Ratliff is a converted DE at 6'3"-300, and was drafted in the 7th round. Marcus Spears starts at LDE, but if you talk to Cowboy fans, he has been an underachiever. Igor Olshansky is a good run defender signed from San Diego to replace the departed Chris Canty.

Miami: Had long time vets Vonnie Holliday and Kevin Carter starting for them at DE last season, and now have been eplaced by second year players Jevon Langford and Philip Merling. The NT is also a greybeard in Jason Ferguson, who at 6'3"-305 is hardly a force in the middle.

The key to the Broncos defense, IMO, is what we can get at the LDE position. Personally, I hope this is a good fit for Marcus Thomas and he can take the position and hold onto it. As a former projected first round talent, Thomas at 6'3"-316 has the size and ability to be a force, particularly against the run. In year three, he needs to turn it on.

Kenny Peterson is an under-rated player and will do just fine at RDE, and Ronald Fields should be solid, if unspectacular in the middle.

The youngsters we have brought in, such as Chris Baker (6'3"-328), Everette Pedescleaux (6'5"-305) and Rulon Davis (6'5"-281) are all interesting developmental players to watch, so if the Broncos can steal a player or two from that group, that would be a plus.

The Broncos are certainly much bigger along the front, and with guys that are going to bust their tail, so they could suprise.

Remember, no one thought the 'Browncos' we traded for in '05 were going to amount to anything either, and they at least had one decent season.

Still, to me, it comes down to the LB's.

Ayers has to prove he is a force. Dumervil has to prove he can play in a 3-4, and someone else, Reid, Moss or Crowder, has to step forward and contribute.

What this all coms down to for me is that there is something to scheme, beng placed in a better position to succeed, coaching and chemistry.

Look at players like Mike Vrabel, who was cut by the Steelers and then became a very improtant player for the Patriots.

Look at the James Harrison with the Steelers, and the fact he was cut a few times before he stuck. Would anyone ever thought he would become the NFL's Defensive MVP?

I seriously doubt it.

The Chargers have made undrafted free agents and late round draft choices like Jacques Cesaire and Stephen Cooper work for them.

It's all about how you fit into the puzzle, and how well you play your role.

Hell, the Steelers had former Broncos 4th round bust Nick Eason as part of their d-line rotation last season, so why can't we find the same thing with Ryan McBean?

Beantown Bronco
08-11-2009, 08:58 AM
All well and good, but the thread title is "straight talk on the DLine" and that was the part I was specifically addressing.

When someone claims that what the Broncos did this season in bringing in "team guys" with less pedigree is on par with what NE and Pitt do, then I have a problem with that. Maybe that's true to some extent for the back seven, but not the DLine.

vancejohnson82
08-11-2009, 09:01 AM
1. Then you obviously have never looked.
2. Yes they did... and they're also a far superior football team that will be picking later than Denver next season AND received a 4th round pick as well. Thank you for giving me another example of how inept the FO was in the Smith pick trade.

If we had made the trade the other, the naysayers would have been playing the "We needed that pick/the team needs talent/who cares about a 4th round pick next year/etc.." argument

if Smith can come in and give us nickel play and ST play in the first year and then slowly become Champ's replacement it was worth the pick

Black59Razor
08-11-2009, 09:08 AM
All well and good, but the thread title is "straight talk on the DLine" and that was the part I was specifically addressing.

When someone claims that what the Broncos did this season in bringing in "team guys" with less pedigree is on par with what NE and Pitt do, then I have a problem with that. Maybe that's true to some extent for the back seven, but not the DLine.

But that is easy to say, but where do you get these players?

This wasn't a great draft for d-linemen, and there wasn't alot available in free agency, and these cats don't grow on trees.

I think the Broncos did about as good as they could.

For example, I am not sure how much better a prosepct New England's second round draft choice, Ron Brace is over Denvers UDFA Chris Baker.

Some draft services had Baker as high as a third round projection, and he was once an elite recruit at Penn St.

Guys like Fields are there to do a decent job now. I don't think anyone projects him long term. Marcus Thomas is a guy with the talent to be a legit starter and is only in his third year...what can he become?

I think the idea now is the first step is to stop the bleeding. If the Broncos can begin to make some improvement on defense, say to the 18-20 range, then we can build on that.

Whatever it is, the Broncos are going to be in a good position to go get more players in the next draft, which from a distance, looks much, much better and deeper in d-line prospects.

The bottom line is, there are alot of unknows associated with what we have, and I think the Broncos are just looking to find a piece or two to build on for the future.

TonyR
08-11-2009, 09:11 AM
Look at some of the d-linemen from some of these teams:


Good post. It is interesting that these teams don't necessarily have a bunch of big name, Pro Bowl type players on them and yet their defenses are pretty good. Gives me some hope for this Broncos team, but like you said the LB's have to be good and we have some huge question marks.

Black59Razor
08-11-2009, 09:15 AM
Good post. It is interesting that these teams don't necessarily have a bunch of big name, Pro Bowl type players on them and yet their defenses are pretty good. Gives me some hope for this Broncos team, but like you said the LB's have to be good and we have some huge question marks.

I agree, but the good thing is, as I menitoned, the draft next year looks to be much deeper in d-line prosepcts, and there are a bunch of 3-4 LB types, so the Broncos are going to be able to add more players to fit their scheme.

Beantown Bronco
08-11-2009, 09:18 AM
But that is easy to say, but where do you get these players?

This wasn't a great draft for d-linemen, and there wasn't alot available in free agency, and these cats don't grow on trees.

I think the Broncos did about as good as they could.......

There's a difference between (1) criticizing the Broncos moves on the DLine and (2) disagreeing with someone who was comparing those moves to what other successful teams are doing. I get the feeling you think I'm doing the former when in fact I'm doing the latter.

lex
08-11-2009, 09:33 AM
If we had made the trade the other, the naysayers would have been playing the "We needed that pick/the team needs talent/who cares about a 4th round pick next year/etc.." argument

if Smith can come in and give us nickel play and ST play in the first year and then slowly become Champ's replacement it was worth the pick


A first round pick on a nickel back? Guess again. He really needs to make an impact this year for it to be worth the pick.

Black59Razor
08-11-2009, 09:36 AM
There's a difference between (1) criticizing the Broncos moves on the DLine and (2) disagreeing with someone who was comparing those moves to what other successful teams are doing. I get the feeling you think I'm doing the former when in fact I'm doing the latter.


No, I am not assuming anything. I am not so presumptous to speak for you; you can do that for yourself.

Look, the Broncos line was a complete disaster area last year, we all knew that...but we also should know that it is not an immediate fix.

Some clamored for BJ Raji, for example, and thought he was going to be the key to rebuilding the line, yet he is a hold out with the Packers, and is probably not going to amount to much his rookie year beyond the huge jack the Packers will pay him.

Is it possible that a player like Baker, with similar size, strength and athletic skill, now prodded by having his livelyhood on the line, and who will bust his ass every day could ultimately become a better player than Raji?

It's not out of the question.

Fields and Peterson are what they are. They are not going to make anyone forget the Richard Seymour's or the Aaron Smith's of the league, but can they be beter than what we played with last season?

I think they are, and I think we can be much better in as little as a year if we can add a few more good players in the offseason.

Do you remember when Shanahan took over the Broncos, and what he had on the d-line?

In the first year, he went out and signed Cleveland FA DT's James Jones and Michael Dean Perry...a year later, he released both of those players, and went and got Keith Traylor from KC, who had rehabbed his career after getting cut by Denver, and playing in NFL Europe, and found Maa Tanuvasa off the scrap heap.

To me, McD is in the same situation now. I think he is looking for a piece or two from players like Marcus Thomas, Chris Baker, Everette Pedescleaux, Rulon Davis, etc, who all have tools to work with, and then will supplement that next offseason.

...and at the end of the day, I would take Ronald Fields and Kenny Peterson over Dewayne Robertson, Ebenezer Ekuban and Jon Engleberger anyday, and twice on Sundays.

TheReverend
08-11-2009, 09:37 AM
If we had made the trade the other, the naysayers would have been playing the "We needed that pick/the team needs talent/who cares about a 4th round pick next year/etc.." argument

if Smith can come in and give us nickel play and ST play in the first year and then slowly become Champ's replacement it was worth the pick

A. I have a hard time people would knock this team with so many holes stock piling picks and creating a roster with depth... especially with this many need positions

B. No, it wouldn't be worth the pick.
Example: Let's say Seattle uses our pick and takes "Mount Cody" from Bama. Smith will have to have a better career than this prototypical NT stud to have been worth it... otherwise we'll all know we could've addressed a severe need and extremely valuable position for a ****ing decade. Smith better be a ****load more than a nickle corner...

Black59Razor
08-11-2009, 09:40 AM
A first round pick on a nickel back? Guess again. He really needs to make an impact this year for it to be worth the pick.

I think it is pretty clear Alphonso is being groomed to replace Champ as the starting cornerback, and maybe as soon as next season.

vancejohnson82
08-11-2009, 09:40 AM
A first round pick on a nickel back? Guess again. He really needs to make an impact this year for it to be worth the pick.

IN THE FIRST YEAR dude....

but hey, thats a good idea....lets stick rookies out there on Day 1 as the starters at the most difficult positions to play and judge them on that....not to mention ruining the guys learning curve AND failing to let him learn behind possibly the greatest player at that position

if he contributes on Special Teams and is our nickel back in YEAR ONE, he's on the right track...

but hey, this guy could make the pro bowl and you still would want him tarred and feathered up there next to McD

vancejohnson82
08-11-2009, 09:46 AM
A. I have a hard time people would knock this team with so many holes stock piling picks and creating a roster with depth... especially with this many need positions

B. No, it wouldn't be worth the pick.
Example: Let's say Seattle uses our pick and takes "Mount Cody" from Bama. Smith will have to have a better career than this prototypical NT stud to have been worth it... otherwise we'll all know we could've addressed a severe need and extremely valuable position for a ****ing decade. Smith better be a ****load more than a nickle corner...


There are so many variables involved with the swapping of the picks that predicting and analyzing the future value is going to be an exercise in futility for the two of us. My point was that this was a move to address an immediate need for the team (by immediate, I mean Champ declining over the next two years and Smith taking over.) With a guy like Cody, plugging him into this makeshift line next year would have done no good and with our mediocre LBers (unless something drastic happens this year with these guys) and no CHamp or Dawkins long term this defense would be screwed...

Black59Razor
08-11-2009, 09:47 AM
A. I have a hard time people would knock this team with so many holes stock piling picks and creating a roster with depth... especially with this many need positions

B. No, it wouldn't be worth the pick.
Example: Let's say Seattle uses our pick and takes "Mount Cody" from Bama. Smith will have to have a better career than this prototypical NT stud to have been worth it... otherwise we'll all know we could've addressed a severe need and extremely valuable position for a ****ing decade. Smith better be a ****load more than a nickle corner...

The bottom line is, the draft picks are out of control, and it is a HUGE risk for teams to have tow high round draft choices.

Just watch what will happen to the St. Louis Rams in a few years time....the money they have had to pay Chris Long and Jason Smith is going to handicap them, make no mistake about it.

Look at how much Seattle had to over-pay for Aaron Curry, now they are going to add two first round picks to that?

Look at the kind of money BJ Raji and Michael Crabtree are holding out for, and they guarantee you nothing.

The reality is, 50% of these guys turn out to be complete busts, and I absolutely believe this factored into McD's thinking.

Finacial considerations were always a part of what the Patriots do, and they have been masters at managing their cap situation, which has allowed them to go out and get the pieces they need.

There is, and should have been a financial consideration for the Broncos two first round draft choices next season.

Ultimately, the only thing that matters is what kind of player Alphonso Smith becomes. Who Seattle ultimately drafts is irrelevant.

The Broncos will still have a full set of draft choices, and they will be in the best salary cap position they have been in for years next offseason, partially by avoiding the huge contract extension Cutler was going to command, ala Eli and Rivers, and the ridiculous money it would have cost them for their two first round draft choices.

TheReverend
08-11-2009, 09:49 AM
There are so many variables involved with the swapping of the picks that predicting and analyzing the future value is going to be an exercise in futility for the two of us. My point was that this was a move to address an immediate need for the team (by immediate, I mean Champ declining over the next two years and Smith taking over.) With a guy like Cody, plugging him into this makeshift line next year would have done no good and with our mediocre LBers (unless something drastic happens this year with these guys) and no CHamp or Dawkins long term this defense would be screwed...

So we should just give up on the front seven then...? :spit:

TheReverend
08-11-2009, 09:52 AM
Ultimately, the only thing that matters is what kind of player Alphonso Smith becomes. Who Seattle ultimately drafts is irrelevant

No... no, it's not. If we miss on a dominant football player, even if Smith becomes solid or good, we lose... big.

vancejohnson82
08-11-2009, 09:54 AM
So we should just give up on the front seven then...? :spit:

No...but to me, we would need to add a few pieces before drafting a top 5 guy on the DL and giving him that money.....thats like buying a hot tub and trying to install it in a tent

Black59Razor
08-11-2009, 09:56 AM
So we should just give up on the front seven then...? :spit:

No, but it is completely naive to think the Broncos could have made a complete overhaul in one offseason.

It is and will be a work in progress, but it will get done.

McD is much more savvy and shrewd than alot of people even realize at this point.

The stuff he is getting criticized for is actually funny to me, because alot of it is so far ahead of the curve, people just can't see it.

'Oh, how could he trade a protential top ten pick for a nickleback...'

Well, A) Smith is going to eventually be Champs replacement as a starter on this defense, was the best cover corner in the draft, and he was signed to second round money, and
B) using BJ Raji as an example, how much is he helping the Green Bay Packers right about now?

It's not so simple to say that first round draft choices, particularly top 10 picks are the be-all, end all...in fact, far from it.

Black59Razor
08-11-2009, 09:57 AM
No... no, it's not. If we miss on a dominant football player, even if Smith becomes solid or good, we lose... big.

...and what if Seattle's pick is a bust?

Afterall, it is about a 50/50 proposition...

Beantown Bronco
08-11-2009, 10:00 AM
The Broncos will still have a full set of draft choices, and they will be in the best salary cap position they have been in for years next offseason

I literally know 31 other teams that can say the same thing.

lex
08-11-2009, 10:02 AM
I think it is pretty clear Alphonso is being groomed to replace Champ as the starting cornerback, and maybe as soon as next season.


CB is a position that typically can contribute right away. DL usually takes a year or so to get on board with the NFL. If its going to take a CB a year to get on board, they might as well have gone with a DL.

Beantown Bronco
08-11-2009, 10:03 AM
No, but it is completely naive to think the Broncos could have made a complete overhaul in one offseason.

Which is funny, because one could actually make a successful argument for why McDaniels appeared to be trying to do just this impossible task by "blowing his wad" this offseason and not holding onto both #1s next year.

The stuff he is getting criticized for is actually funny to me, because alot of it is so far ahead of the curve, people just can't see it.

I'm sure that's it.

vancejohnson82
08-11-2009, 10:08 AM
CB is a position that typically can contribute right away. DL usually takes a year or so to get on board with the NFL. If its going to take a CB a year to get on board, they might as well have gone with a DL.

so we go from starting to "contributing"....as if him being our nickel guy wouldnt be contributing? cmon

look at some of the guys who were drafted early at CB...a few of these guys started right away and I think it hurt their careers: Buchanon, Trufant, Jammer

and none of them had the option of sitting a year behind a guy like Bailey and being groomed into the position....

Black59Razor
08-11-2009, 11:13 AM
Which is funny, because one could actually make a successful argument for why McDaniels appeared to be trying to do just this impossible task by "blowing his wad" this offseason and not holding onto both #1s next year.



I'm sure that's it.


Yet again, the Broncos have a full selection of draft choices, and no one is sure where the Broncos or Bears draft choices are going to end up, so it's more of 'the sky is falling' stuff that has been so pervasive over the last several months.

If Alphonso Smith becomes a Pro Bowl corner, and Seattle's selection is a bust, or if Chicago has the same record as the Broncos, all the bitching about the trade will look pretty silly.

This is entirely possible, since about half the first round draft choices do not live up to their advanced billing anyway.

Black59Razor
08-11-2009, 11:16 AM
CB is a position that typically can contribute right away. DL usually takes a year or so to get on board with the NFL. If its going to take a CB a year to get on board, they might as well have gone with a DL.


It doesn't matter.

It still comes down to the talent of the player.

The Broncos have had so much trouble in their draft time and again because they draftred out of need...players like Willie Middlebrooks and Deltha O'Neal and Ashley Lelie...I still can't believe Shanahan drafted Lelie over Ed Reed, but those were need selections, and they blew up in the Broncos faces.

Every year, teams reach on a player out of need, and alot of times those picks turn out to be disasters.

You take the best players you can get, and there just wasn't alot available on the d-line.

Robert Ayers was as good as anyone, IMO, and we got him at 18.

Black59Razor
08-11-2009, 11:19 AM
I literally know 31 other teams that can say the same thing.

Actually, no you can't.

If you want to mope around and say everything is going to suck, that is your perogative, just understand, your opinion is exactly that, and it does not make you right.

Beantown Bronco
08-11-2009, 11:25 AM
Actually, no you can't.


What!? By definition, in a capless year (like 2010 currently is) every team in the league is "in the best salary cap position they have been in for years." Tell me.....what part of my statement is incorrect?

If you want to mope around and say everything is going to suck, that is your perogative, just understand, your opinion is exactly that, and it does not make you right.

Hey, aren't you the same guy that said this:

I am not so presumptous to speak for you; you can do that for yourself.

Show me one place where I said ANYTHING was going to suck or I moped around.

Looks to me like you're putting words in my mouth.

I'll do this again.....slowly. One person compared the Broncos DLine acquisitions to what the Pats and Steelers did. I called him out on this by pointing out the differences. All I was doing was pointing out that the Pats used exclusively high picks on the DLine and the Broncos chose not to. I made no commentary at all about the overall quality of the Broncos moves or whether or not I agreed with them. You implied that I was doing so somehow.

lex
08-11-2009, 11:33 AM
It doesn't matter.

It still comes down to the talent of the player.

The Broncos have had so much trouble in their draft time and again because they draftred out of need...players like Willie Middlebrooks and Deltha O'Neal and Ashley Lelie...I still can't believe Shanahan drafted Lelie over Ed Reed, but those were need selections, and they blew up in the Broncos faces.

Every year, teams reach on a player out of need, and alot of times those picks turn out to be disasters.

You take the best players you can get, and there just wasn't alot available on the d-line.

Robert Ayers was as good as anyone, IMO, and we got him at 18.

What kills your comment is the fact that Brace was apparently good enough for Belichick.

BroncoBuff
08-11-2009, 11:41 AM
Afterall, it is about a 50/50 proposition...

True. But by that logic, either Ayers or Smith busts.

Tombstone RJ
08-11-2009, 11:52 AM
What kills your comment is the fact that Brace was apparently good enough for Belichick.

That was a luxury pick, nothing more. I've already explained this once, not gonna do it again...

Tombstone RJ
08-11-2009, 11:53 AM
"Black59Razor" that is a play, yes?

TonyR
08-11-2009, 11:59 AM
Just watch what will happen to the St. Louis Rams in a few years time....the money they have had to pay Chris Long and Jason Smith is going to handicap them, make no mistake about it.


Good points. Add KC to the list. They'll be hamstrung by Dorsey and Jackson, particularly if one or both of them bust.

Beantown Bronco
08-11-2009, 12:00 PM
That was a luxury pick, nothing more. I've already explained this once, not gonna do it again...

No moreso than the A. Smith pick. The way things are shaping up, Champ is more likely to be playing for the Broncos in 2010 than Wilfork is with the Pats.

TheReverend
08-11-2009, 12:01 PM
No, but it is completely naive to think the Broncos could have made a complete overhaul in one offseason.

It is and will be a work in progress, but it will get done.

McD is much more savvy and shrewd than alot of people even realize at this point.

The stuff he is getting criticized for is actually funny to me, because alot of it is so far ahead of the curve, people just can't see it.

'Oh, how could he trade a protential top ten pick for a nickleback...'

Well, A) Smith is going to eventually be Champs replacement as a starter on this defense, was the best cover corner in the draft, and he was signed to second round money, and
B) using BJ Raji as an example, how much is he helping the Green Bay Packers right about now?

It's not so simple to say that first round draft choices, particularly top 10 picks are the be-all, end all...in fact, far from it.

Listen to your OWN statement!

I'm saying we should've kept the value and been patient with the rebuild while you support blowing your wad on a DB now...

Tombstone RJ
08-11-2009, 12:03 PM
No moreso than the A. Smith pick. The way things are shaping up, Champ is more likely to be playing for the Broncos in 2010 than Wilfork is with the Pats.

Complete speculation on your part, but ok...

TonyR
08-11-2009, 12:03 PM
A first round pick on a nickel back? Guess again. He really needs to make an impact this year for it to be worth the pick.

It's been pointed out numerous times that nickels play on about 60% of snaps. Plus do you really think Champ will play in all 16 games?

Tombstone RJ
08-11-2009, 12:05 PM
Listen to your OWN statement!

I'm saying we should've kept the value and been patient with the rebuild while you support blowing your wad on a DB now...

Now your just arguing to argue.

Black59Razor has already stated that the Broncos have plenty of picks and that first round picks are a complete crap shoot, especially high first round picks.

Not sure what you are trying to prove...

oubronco
08-11-2009, 12:06 PM
True. But by that logic, either Ayers or Smith busts.

or another two picks and these guys rock

TheReverend
08-11-2009, 12:13 PM
so we go from starting to "contributing"....as if him being our nickel guy wouldnt be contributing? cmon

look at some of the guys who were drafted early at CB...a few of these guys started right away and I think it hurt their careers: Buchanon, Trufant, Jammer

and none of them had the option of sitting a year behind a guy like Bailey and being groomed into the position....

Oh that's just silly.

Recent guys who worked their way into a full time started in their first year:

Rodgers Cromartie
Aaron Ross
Darrelle Revis
Leon Hall

Other first round pedigrees and the amount they started their rookie year:

Mike Jenkins with 3
Antoine Cason with 3
Aqib Talib with 2
Leodis McKelvin had 6 games as well

Sooooo... ZERO corners with that pedigree in the last two years didn't get starting experience, and many of them became prolific players their ROOKIE year.

TheReverend
08-11-2009, 12:14 PM
Now your just arguing to argue.

Black59Razor has already stated that the Broncos have plenty of picks and that first round picks are a complete crap shoot, especially high first round picks.

Not sure what you are trying to prove...

Has this seriously become what you guys believe now?

Really?

Hilarious!

BroncoMan4ever
08-11-2009, 12:31 PM
Cool. That was the same reason John Engelberger was brought in.

good point, but unlike Shanahan, McD isn't going to keep an Engleberger or Nate Jackson around long term when it is obvious he sucks.

oubronco
08-11-2009, 12:35 PM
we can only hope

vancejohnson82
08-11-2009, 01:02 PM
Oh that's just silly.

Recent guys who worked their way into a full time started in their first year:

Rodgers Cromartie
Aaron Ross
Darrelle Revis
Leon Hall

Other first round pedigrees and the amount they started their rookie year:

Mike Jenkins with 3
Antoine Cason with 3
Aqib Talib with 2
Leodis McKelvin had 6 games as well

Sooooo... ZERO corners with that pedigree in the last two years didn't get starting experience, and many of them became prolific players their ROOKIE year.


ok...so the problem with that is when we trot our first round CB out there and he gets lit up (a la Cromartie Week 2)...you and the gang will be burning down the intranets

my point is that he WILL get play this year....a LOT of it...so why are we rushing to get him out there and start all 16 games???? to prove the pick in the first year

Revis had lots of growing pains but they HAD to start him....they didnt have a Champ or even a Goodman....thats what makes this a GREAT pick...the fact that we can have him learn for a year or two with these guys

TheReverend
08-11-2009, 01:14 PM
ok...so the problem with that is when we trot our first round CB out there and he gets lit up (a la Cromartie Week 2)...you and the gang will be burning down the intranets

my point is that he WILL get play this year....a LOT of it...so why are we rushing to get him out there and start all 16 games???? to prove the pick in the first year

Revis had lots of growing pains but they HAD to start him....they didnt have a Champ or even a Goodman....thats what makes this a GREAT pick...the fact that we can have him learn for a year or two with these guys

Ummm, are you talking about a different Cromartie? Rogers Cromartie plays for the Cardinals and was a major reason they were in the Super Bowl... as a rookie.

But I think it's funny you bring up Antonio Cromartie considering your POV... he didn't start any games his rookie year...

And no, I'm not suggesting rushing Alphonso. I'm SAYING that you're 100% wrong when you create this fantasy that Corners starting their rookie season is an insurmountable task, when in reality, it's one of the EASIEST positions when it comes to mental transition... much like RB and OLB.

And yes, he needs to be good. If he's a nickle playing 40% of the snaps, it's still not good enough, imo.

TheReverend
08-11-2009, 01:16 PM
PS. WTF on Revis? He had an incredible rookie season which also helped carry over to a pro bowl berth in his second year.

Tombstone RJ
08-11-2009, 01:21 PM
Has this seriously become what you guys believe now?

Really?

Hilarious!

So, you guarantee all the picks?

Are you sure Stafford is worth $42m guaranteed? Your gonna get behind that contract and say it's a "can't miss."?

Point being, BRONCOS have plenty of PICKS for NEXT YEAR'S DRAFT!

TheReverend
08-11-2009, 01:24 PM
So, you guarantee all the picks?

Are you sure Stafford is worth $42m guaranteed? Your gonna get behind that contract and say it's a "can't miss."?

Point being, BRONCOS have plenty of PICKS for NEXT YEAR'S DRAFT!

:rofl: Exactly not what I said... but nice try.

Let me guess, you want the Bears to win the Superbowl so we don't have to worry about a high pick right?

Or is it that in reality this is just how you're rationalizing not having our pick, and if the Bears tank and we have a high pick you'll be doing F'ing cartwheels.

Ding, ding, ding...

vancejohnson82
08-11-2009, 01:38 PM
PS. WTF on Revis? He had an incredible rookie season which also helped carry over to a pro bowl berth in his second year.

dude, did you watch games early in the year? he was great from game 7 on but he was beat up a little bit early in the year....especially in the red zone

TheReverend
08-11-2009, 01:39 PM
dude, did you watch games early in the year? he was great from game 7 on but he was beat up a little bit early in the year....especially in the red zone

07 or 08? Also, EVERYONE gets beat up a little playing corner... For some reason Rivers even has Champ's number, so I'm not sure what that has to do with 2 pro bowl worthy seasons in 2 years in the NFL...

Tombstone RJ
08-11-2009, 01:59 PM
:rofl: Exactly not what I said... but nice try.

Let me guess, you want the Bears to win the Superbowl so we don't have to worry about a high pick right?

Or is it that in reality this is just how you're rationalizing not having our pick, and if the Bears tank and we have a high pick you'll be doing F'ing cartwheels.

Ding, ding, ding...

You keep going in circles because all you have is your circular logic: "Broncos gave up their first round pick in next year's draft (which is gonna be a high pick, wooohooo!) and in return got CB, boohoo! McD is stupid! McD is stupid!"

Counter argument which is going right over your head is this: First, you have no clue as to how high the draft pick is going to be. Second, the value of next year's first round pick is less because it's in next year's draft. Third, the Broncos don't want to pay for 4 first round picks in 2 years, not with the money that is being dolled out for these guys. Fourth, the Broncos already have a plethora of picks in next year's draft. Fifth, Alphonso Smith is the best CB in this year's draft. Sixth, the Broncos got the best CB in this year's draft for second round money. Seventh, this year's draft was a weak draft for defensive lineman. Eighth, next year's draft is deeper on the defensive line. Ninth, NEVER REACH FOR A PLAYER OUT OF NEED. And tenth, your a moron.

lex
08-11-2009, 02:04 PM
IN THE FIRST YEAR dude....

but hey, thats a good idea....lets stick rookies out there on Day 1 as the starters at the most difficult positions to play and judge them on that....not to mention ruining the guys learning curve AND failing to let him learn behind possibly the greatest player at that position

if he contributes on Special Teams and is our nickel back in YEAR ONE, he's on the right track...

but hey, this guy could make the pro bowl and you still would want him tarred and feathered up there next to McD

Reverand has done a solid job articulating rebuttals on this. All this is, is pre-emptive McDaniels excuse making. Your arguments are so without basis it makes it so transparent.

Beantown Bronco
08-11-2009, 02:09 PM
and tenth, your a moron.

:spit:

lex
08-11-2009, 02:12 PM
:spit:

He might as well have just skipped 10 and went from 9 to 11. LOL

TheReverend
08-11-2009, 02:39 PM
You keep going in circles because all you have is your circular logic: "Broncos gave up their first round pick in next year's draft (which is gonna be a high pick, wooohooo!) and in return got CB, boohoo! McD is stupid! McD is stupid!"

No... I've been in the same spot this entire conversation. You're the one changing what you've been saying. My statement (simplified for your apparent comprehensive deficiencies):

The FO re: Alphonso Smith should not just be rated against Alphonso's play, but against the play of the potential players available at Denver's pick in the 2010 draft.

There's nothing unfair about that. There's nothing condemning about Alphonso. It's plain and simple and an extremely fair judgment for the FO next year.

Counter argument which is going right over your head is this: First, you have no clue as to how high the draft pick is going to be. Second, the value of next year's first round pick is less because it's in next year's draft. Third, the Broncos don't want to pay for 4 first round picks in 2 years, not with the money that is being dolled out for these guys. Fourth, the Broncos already have a plethora of picks in next year's draft. Fifth, Alphonso Smith is the best CB in this year's draft. Sixth, the Broncos got the best CB in this year's draft for second round money. Seventh, this year's draft was a weak draft for defensive lineman. Eighth, next year's draft is deeper on the defensive line. Ninth, NEVER REACH FOR A PLAYER OUT OF NEED. And tenth, your a moron.

1. Correct.
2. This is because of #1 (so, see #1). Also, there's a reason Seattle asked for OUR pick instead of Chicago's next year. The majority of teams actually put a ranking on what they feel other team's future picks will be worth, fyi.
3. If Den didn't want to pay 4 first round picks in 2 years, why not make the conditions of the trade different to begin with? :rofl: Seriously, you're cute though.
4. That's called a "good thing" btw, and enables manuerability on your draft board, not a reason to chip away at them.
5. Really? That's a bold statement from seeing him roughly zero times.
6. See #5
7. So what you're saying here is: This year's draft being weak in D-linemen was a great reason to throw away next years first, then?
8. See number 7... you're actually MAKING MY POINT ON KEEPING THE GODDAMN PICK YOU MORON.
9. Who suggested this? If anything, trading next years first to trade back into the second round to pick Alphonso would be considered the reach!
10. Holy ****, man, you should read what YOU'RE writing. You're arguing AGAINST yourself half the time.
11. Check-mate, fruit.

24champ
08-11-2009, 02:46 PM
1. Correct.
2. This is because of #1 (so, see #1). Also, there's a reason Seattle asked for OUR pick instead of Chicago's next year. The majority of teams actually put a ranking on what they feel other team's future picks will be worth, fyi.
3. If Den didn't want to pay 4 first round picks in 2 years, why not make the conditions of the trade different to begin with? Seriously, you're cute though.
4. That's called a "good thing" btw, and enables manuerability on your draft board, not a reason to chip away at them.
5. Really? That's a bold statement from seeing him roughly zero times.
6. See #5
7. So what you're saying here is: This year's draft being weak in D-linemen was a great reason to throw away next years first, then?
8. See number 7... you're actually MAKING MY POINT ON KEEPING THE GODDAMN PICK YOU MORON.
9. Who suggested this? If anything, trading next years first to trade back into the second round to pick Alphonso would be considered the reach!
10. Holy ****, man, you should read what YOU'RE writing. You're arguing AGAINST yourself half the time.
11. Check-mate, fruit.

http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/8408/fifty.gif

TonyR
08-11-2009, 02:49 PM
...Rogers Cromartie...

...this fantasy that Corners starting their rookie season is an insurmountable task, when in reality, it's one of the EASIEST positions when it comes to mental transition... much like RB and OLB....


I'm not necessarily disagreeing with your overall points, but...

Rodgers Cromartie started the season as the nickel and took over the starting role in the 6th game. So this comparison would actually support Smith starting the season as the nickel.

As for CB being one of the easiest positions I've heard/read quite the opposite. It's one of the most difficult positions to play in the NFL and is one of the highest paid positions (at one time within a few years it was the highest paid) for a reason. Going from covering college kids to pros in the NFL is a HUGE adjustment.

TheReverend
08-11-2009, 03:01 PM
I'm not necessarily disagreeing with your overall points, but...

Rodgers Cromartie started the season as the nickel and took over the starting role in the 6th game. So this comparison would actually support Smith starting the season as the nickel.

As for CB being one of the easiest positions I've heard/read quite the opposite. It's one of the most difficult positions to play in the NFL and is one of the highest paid positions (at one time within a few years it was the highest paid) for a reason. Going from covering college kids to pros in the NFL is a HUGE adjustment.

You're misreading Tony.

Also, I have no issues with Smith not earning a starting spot out of the gate. That would be way too hasty. However, he'll have to perform at a VERY high level at some point.

RE your last paragraph: That's where you're definitely misreading. I never claimed corner was easy. I claimed the mental transition is one of the easier ones you can make from college to the pros. You can't learn speed, near superhuman agility, or raw reflexes. This is why there are so many hyper talented successful rookie corners, and we can probably expect Alphonso to be in that class.

TheReverend
08-11-2009, 03:02 PM
http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/8408/fifty.gif

I'll see your fiddy and raise you

http://i32.tinypic.com/fnapz.jpg

TonyR
08-11-2009, 03:11 PM
You're misreading Tony.


Agree with you on both points. So yes, I misunderstood.

TheReverend
08-11-2009, 03:17 PM
Agree with you on both points. So yes, I misunderstood.

Even Vance does.

That's why his argument went from:

"If we let Alphonso play football now, it'll destroy him!" to "Darrelle Revis wasn't all-pro his first six games"

Black59Razor
08-11-2009, 03:20 PM
What kills your comment is the fact that Brace was apparently good enough for Belichick.

So are you suggesting Belichick has never made a personnel mistake?

Brace was insurance for Wilfork.

Black59Razor
08-11-2009, 03:23 PM
"Black59Razor" that is a play, yes?

Yeah, that is the cadence you see Montana call out in NFL films from the Broncos/49ers Super Bowl where he threw the strike to Rice for a TD, and Atwater tried in vein to light him up.

Still the most depressing football game I have ever watched.

lex
08-11-2009, 04:44 PM
So are you suggesting Belichick has never made a personnel mistake?

Brace was insurance for Wilfork.

It but it has nothing to do with what I think of Josh's overlord. If you believe in an all things belichick world, then if Brace is good enough for Belichick, he should be good enough for Josh.

And if neither Smith or Brace are going to step in until next season, you might as well take the NT, no? And again, if he is good enough for Josh's overlord, he should be good enough for Josh.

And then there's the matter of what was given to select Smith.

vancejohnson82
08-11-2009, 07:59 PM
Even Vance does.

That's why his argument went from:

"If we let Alphonso play football now, it'll destroy him!" to "Darrelle Revis wasn't all-pro his first six games"

No..the initial disagreement we were having was that Smith would NOT IN ANY WAY amount to his draft spot....then we went on to talk about how it was a good move because he would get some time out of hte starting lineup and learn under CHamp...then you said that perhaps it would have been better to keep the pick and grab a big guy next year with that early spot (hypothetically if we don't do well)...then we began talking about the value of corners anywhere in the draft and how a LOT of guys drafted int he first (which we are saying is SMith's alleged draft spot) make impacts...I retorted that if he plays nickel and does spot duty for Goodman and Champ, that that IS VALUE...

and we seem to agree on that...

right?

also, I'm a moron for messing up the Cromarties.....

TheReverend
08-11-2009, 08:12 PM
No..the initial disagreement we were having was that Smith would NOT IN ANY WAY amount to his draft spot....then we went on to talk about how it was a good move because he would get some time out of hte starting lineup and learn under CHamp...then you said that perhaps it would have been better to keep the pick and grab a big guy next year with that early spot (hypothetically if we don't do well)...then we began talking about the value of corners anywhere in the draft and how a LOT of guys drafted int he first (which we are saying is SMith's alleged draft spot) make impacts...I retorted that if he plays nickel and does spot duty for Goodman and Champ, that that IS VALUE...

and we seem to agree on that...

right?

also, I'm a moron for messing up the Cromarties.....

Judging from your bolded statement, you're apparently misinterpreting the thing I've said at least 20 times in this thread.

It's NOT ABOUT his draft status. It's about what we may lose next season.

I'll cover this again with another clear cut example:

Let's say Alphonso has a HoF career, but Seattle picks Brandon Spikes or Cody next season, and they have a first ballot HoF career and edge Alphonso in impact for their NFL team... then it would still hurt us.

I know that's a silly way to phrase it and an absurd comparison overall, but I'm trying to highlight that it has MORE to do with the FO making an impulsive reach decision, and getting value raped in a weak draft, than it does Alphonso himself. And that's not even taking into account that both of those players in this imaginary scenario would fill gaping holes on the defense at NT and ILB, while Alphonso might not beat JMFW for opening day nickel back.

Is this clear, yet?