PDA

View Full Version : Broncos on the clock/ESPN


bap454
04-07-2010, 06:30 PM
Did anyone catch this segment??
" Weiss told Mcdaniels to go get Brady Quinn" - before he went to the Chiefs....say what!?

http://espn.go.com/blog/afcwest/post/_/id/11817/video-on-the-clock-broncos

bap454
04-07-2010, 06:32 PM
Anyone post over in QuiefsPlanet?? If "Brady Quinn to Denver" is worth forthy-six pages of rants .... this should go over well to sooth there distress.
Any takers?:~ohyah!:

Dagmar
04-07-2010, 06:38 PM
It was an absolute JOKE of a segment.

Pseudofool
04-07-2010, 06:40 PM
Dilfer sure likes the Broncos. In general, these ESPN guys seem a lot higher on the McD Broncos as opposed to, say, the NFL Network guys.

bap454
04-07-2010, 06:41 PM
young Daniel"s" son, you must look past the paint fumes to see the potential.

Dedhed
04-07-2010, 06:48 PM
Since when is it shocking news that Weiss holds the opinion that Quinn is going to be a great NFL QB?

Are people really surprised that McD would call a former co-worker and get his opinion, and that Weiss's opinion would be to get him?

BMarsh615
04-07-2010, 07:24 PM
Wow Cutler's name was only brought up once. If that were Jamie Dukes and Rod Woodson that entire segmant would have been about how dumb McDaniels was for trading away the franchise.

Bronco Boy
04-07-2010, 07:40 PM
Wow Cutler's name was only brought up once. If that were Jamie Dukes and Rod Woodson that entire segmant would have been about how dumb McDaniels was for trading away the franchise.

Ha ha! Exactly!

extralife
04-07-2010, 09:17 PM
Unlike this forum, which never talks about Jay Cutler

watermock
04-07-2010, 09:34 PM
Denver has allready thrown it's marbles on 3 DL and Quinn x2.

Beavis has his index card.

Beavis instantly created a QB rift, the OL, once set is now a mess, in fact, the entire offfense is in dissaray.

The D is old.

VERY OLD.

watermock
04-07-2010, 09:36 PM
Denver got a gift out of Cutler and blew it.

Archer81
04-07-2010, 09:37 PM
Denver got a gift out of Cutler and blew it.


A gift that went 17-20?...

We have different definitions of the word gift.


:Broncos:

gunns
04-07-2010, 09:37 PM
Denver has allready thrown it's marbles on 3 DL and Quinn x2.

Beavis has his index card.

Beavis instantly created a QB rift, the OL, once set is now a mess, in fact, the entire offfense is in dissaray.

The D is old.

VERY OLD.

Denver's 98 SB team was one of the oldest.

Dagmar
04-07-2010, 09:41 PM
Denver got a gift out of Cutler and blew it.

You're on retarded form tonight.

http://i39.tinypic.com/2qbzthf.jpg

http://i42.tinypic.com/153adf4.gif

http://i42.tinypic.com/w70yys.png

http://i39.tinypic.com/21oangp.gif

watermock
04-07-2010, 09:46 PM
I'm talking about our 2#1's and 2 #2's.

You dimwit, Billickeck was busy loading up on NG's and second rounders.

Go check.

Archer81
04-07-2010, 09:47 PM
I'm talking about our 3 #! picks idiot.


We never got 3 #1s. English mock. I cant keep up with you if you only type every 5th word of what you are thinking.


:Broncos:

Dagmar
04-07-2010, 09:49 PM
What's an exclamation mark pick anyway? Before the 1st round?

strafen
04-07-2010, 09:51 PM
Did anyone catch this segment??
" Weiss told Mcdaniels to go get Brady Quinn" - before he went to the Chiefs....say what!?

http://espn.go.com/blog/afcwest/post/_/id/11817/video-on-the-clock-broncosIf we stay the way we are, I expect to have a 3-way QB battle for the starting job.
Yup. I'm including Brandstater in there. We need to find out what we've got in him and whether he'd figure in future plans with the team.
I doubt we'll get a QB in the draft, unless it's someone too good to pass in the later rounds.
Other than that, like those guys from ESPN mentioned, guard, center, and lb should be our top priotities...

(Sorry for reeling this thread back on track) 8')

Dagmar
04-07-2010, 09:52 PM
I'm talking about our 2#1's and 2 #2's.

You dimwit, Billickeck was busy loading up on NG's and second rounders.

Go check.

That edit wasn't fast enough to stop you looking retarded.

watermock
04-07-2010, 09:53 PM
BTW/ Denbver managed to get good value out of cutler and blew it.

Man-Goblin
04-07-2010, 09:54 PM
Mock throwing in the high 90's tonight. Glad to see the heat.

Archer81
04-07-2010, 09:55 PM
BTW/ Denbver managed to get good value out of cutler and blew it.


Its been a year. Let it go.


:Broncos:

Dagmar
04-07-2010, 09:55 PM
http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a276/abinidab/straws.jpg

watermock
04-07-2010, 09:58 PM
Done.

The '09 draft will go down as the worst, just wait smartass.

Don't forget Quinn and Fonzie and 6 of 9 on offense. Idiot.

Archer81
04-07-2010, 09:59 PM
Done.

The '09 draft will go down as the worst, just wait smartass.

Don't forget Quinn and Fonzie and 6 of 9 on offense. Idiot.


Crazy thought.

But if McDaniels had to change 6 of 9 players on offense...maybe our offense was NOT that good to begin with?

Or maybe you should just stick with watching the Vikes.

:Broncos:

Dagmar
04-07-2010, 10:00 PM
http://i40.tinypic.com/67nuh4.png

Man-Goblin
04-07-2010, 10:04 PM
Done.

The '09 draft will go down as the worst, just wait smartass.

Don't forget Quinn and Fonzie and 6 of 9 on offense. Idiot.

I have to say, the Broncos 2003 draft may have the worst draft for evary team evar.

watermock
04-07-2010, 10:04 PM
Want me to go on?

Losing 3 of the best coaches on DC,OC, and RB.

A crap draft.

All our DL are gone in 1 year!

Beacvisa will reach on OL like the idiot that he is.

Unless Marshall is back, we go 6-10.

Archer81
04-07-2010, 10:05 PM
Want me to go on?

Losing 3 of the best coaches on DC,OC, and RB.

A crap draft.

All our DL are gone in 1 year!

Beacvisa will reach on OL like the idiot that he is.

Unless Marshall is back, we go 6-10.


Nolan's defense was slipping at the end of the year.

Our O line could not block.

Turner has not produced a 1000 yard rusher since 2006.

Draft is fine. Stop being negative.


:Broncos:

Dagmar
04-07-2010, 10:07 PM
Want me to go on?

Losing 3 of the best coaches on DC,OC, and RB.

A crap draft.

All our DL are gone in 1 year!

Beacvisa will reach on OL like the idiot that he is.

Unless Marshall is back, we go 6-10.

Beacvisa???

Dagmar
04-07-2010, 10:11 PM
Want me to go on?

Losing 3 of the best coaches on DC,OC, and RB.

A crap draft.

All our DL are gone in 1 year!

Beacvisa will reach on OL like the idiot that he is.

Unless Marshall is back, we go 6-10.

http://i39.tinypic.com/k2beon.png

http://i43.tinypic.com/jj8dn7.png

Sooooooooo...

Lolad
04-07-2010, 10:29 PM
Crazy thought.

But if McDaniels had to change 6 of 9 players on offense...maybe our offense was NOT that good to begin with?

Or maybe you should just stick with watching the Vikes.

:Broncos:

this has been hashed and rehashed. Facts prove it the 2008 Offense was hands down better than the 2009. And thats even with 2009 having a better defense which means we got more possessions.

Now the detractors will come behind me and say.... "Well we had a tough schedule" ROFL!

strafen
04-07-2010, 10:32 PM
this has been hashed and rehashed. Facts prove it the 2008 offense was hands down better than the 2009. And thats even with 2009 having a better defense which means we got more possessions.

Now the detractors will come behind me and say.... "well we had a tough schedule" rofl!

+1

TheReverend
04-07-2010, 10:56 PM
I think Mock made some solid points in this thread and people discredited him immediately due to crippled fingers hitting some wrong keys and other issues that completely ignored the content of his posts.

He's right to address these facts, imo:

We had a fantastic young offense that wasn't nearly as fantastic last season.
We had a regression in our OL, whether due to new scheme or age or whatever.
We lost a Broncos coaching STAPLE in Bobby Turner.
We also lost Nolan and Dennison.

I think Wink has the tools to be successful as a DC, so I'm very optimistic about him, and I think we have a goddamn stellar defensive staff on the whole... but for the past year I've thought our offensive staff (outside of McD himself) has been f'ing garbage.

Here's to hoping for the best, but Mock did raise some extremely valid concerns, imo.

baja
04-07-2010, 11:02 PM
Want me to go on?

Losing 3 of the best coaches on DC,OC, and RB.

A crap draft.

All our DL are gone in 1 year!

Beacvisa will reach on OL like the idiot that he is.

Unless Marshall is back, we go 6-10.

Two days ago it was not less than 11 wins what happened to make you think we lose 50% more games than you predicted two days ago.

Popps
04-07-2010, 11:12 PM
Denver got a gift out of Cutler and blew it.

http://img310.imageshack.us/img310/3439/rofl1y3sn.jpg

baja
04-07-2010, 11:28 PM
Denver got a gift out of Cutler and blew it.

Chronologically shouldn't that be the other way around?

BroncoBuff
04-07-2010, 11:41 PM
Done.

The '09 draft will go down as the worst, just wait smartass.

Don't forget Quinn and Fonzie and 6 of 9 on offense. Idiot.

Every one a valid point, mock, but you make them in such a d!ck!sh way.

The Quinn pick will almost certainly be a bad one in hindsight ... both where we drafted him and what we gave up to do so. But I still have very high hopes for Alphonso ... way too early to give up on him.


Its been a year. Let it go.

You're kidding, right?

Might want to brace yourself, because the discussions about who won the Cutler trade have barely begun ...

BroncoBuff
04-07-2010, 11:47 PM
http://i40.tinypic.com/67nuh4.png

Two starters including Crowder in Tampa Bay ... and MT was in heavy rotation, so that's 3 out of 4. Pretending Crowder is not a solid NFL player is just wrong, because he is: 4 starts, 43 tackles, 3.5 sacks.

So even with his worst turn, you're gonna have to do a LOT better than that to make the (way) uphill climb that Jim Goodman was not a brilliant draft-master. Because he was.

strafen
04-08-2010, 12:00 AM
Two starters including Crowder in Tampa Bay ... and MT was in heavy rotation, so that's 3 out of 4. Pretending Crowder is not a solid NFL player is just wrong, because he is: 4 starts, 43 tackles, 3.5 sacks.

So even with his worst turn, you're gonna have to do a LOT better than that to make the (way) uphill climb that Jim Goodman was not a brilliant draft-master. Because he was.

Yeah.
Rxcept for Jarvis Moss whose career seems to still be on life support

BroncoBuff
04-08-2010, 12:03 AM
Yeah.
Rxcept for Jarvis Moss whose career seems to still be on life support

Yeah, he's a bust clearly .... plus we traded up for him.

Bad bad bad.

cutthemdown
04-08-2010, 02:14 AM
Broncos didnt get a great player out of the Cutler deal yet. We will have to wait and see. Maybe Ayers can still be good.

meangene
04-08-2010, 03:42 AM
Wow Cutler's name was only brought up once. If that were Jamie Dukes and Rod Woodson that entire segmant would have been about how dumb McDaniels was for trading away the franchise.

Last week Douche said the Broncos could draft Dez White because McDaniels needed another receiver to "insult". ****ing tool! And Vick is the answer at quarterback for the Rams, Seahawks, Bills, Panthers, etc., etc.... He could beat out Kolb, you know!

Drek
04-08-2010, 04:50 AM
Every one a valid point, mock, but you make them in such a d!ck!sh way.

The Quinn pick will almost certainly be a bad one in hindsight ... both where we drafted him and what we gave up to do so. But I still have very high hopes for Alphonso ... way too early to give up on him.
Its probably also way too early to give up on Quinn, who was our #3 TE last year and will likely be moving to #2 TE this year.

Most #3 TEs don't see a ton of game time.

What more does it take though, honestly? McDaniels outright said just a few weeks ago that he doesn't want young guys to play early, that he wants them to learn behind veterans, and yet people still expect immediate results. Not going to happen. That is not the plan.


You're kidding, right?

Might want to brace yourself, because the discussions about who won the Cutler trade have barely begun ...
I'm quite happy with our return on it. But yes, the discussions have barely begun because now it all gets put in the entirely new perspective of Cutler = 2 1sts, a 3rd, and Orton while McNabb = 2nd and a conditional 3rd or 4th.

Will be a fun year in review at the end of 2010. You do realize there is a growing possibility that by the end of 2010 Cutler will look like the worst QB in his own division right? And that he was #3 last season because #4 was a rookie playing on the first team to lose every game the year before.

Blueflame
04-08-2010, 05:07 AM
I think Mock made some solid points in this thread and people discredited him immediately due to crippled fingers hitting some wrong keys and other issues that completely ignored the content of his posts.

He's right to address these facts, imo:

We had a fantastic young offense that wasn't nearly as fantastic last season.
We had a regression in our OL, whether due to new scheme or age or whatever.
We lost a Broncos coaching STAPLE in Bobby Turner.
We also lost Nolan and Dennison.

I think Wink has the tools to be successful as a DC, so I'm very optimistic about him, and I think we have a goddamn stellar defensive staff on the whole... but for the past year I've thought our offensive staff (outside of McD himself) has been f'ing garbage.

Here's to hoping for the best, but Mock did raise some extremely valid concerns, imo.

Unless Alfonso Smith steps it up and turns into a super-stud, the Broncos fanbase will never forgive McD for giving up the first rounder for him. That trade... this year's #1 for (Seattle's) last year's 2nd rounder... was arguably the stupidest thing McD has ever done.

cutthemdown
04-08-2010, 05:12 AM
Unless Alfonso Smith steps it up and turns into a super-stud, the Broncos fanbase will never forgive McD for giving up the first rounder for him. That trade... this year's #1 for (Seattle's) last year's 2nd rounder... was arguably the stupidest thing McD has ever done.

It was very Bobby Beatherd. Reminds me of stuff he used to do back with the Chargers and sort of the Redskins before that.

You can look like a fool if it doesnt work out. Even though tons of first rounders will stink, people still make a big deal out of the ones you trade.

WolfpackGuy
04-08-2010, 05:48 AM
Bobby Beathard


Overrated

He wouldn't have lasted 5 minutes had there been a salary cap in the 80's.

And whatever lower round players he did find, they're all negated by the Ryan Leaf trade/pick.

Dedhed
04-08-2010, 05:57 AM
All our DL are gone in 1 year!



The depth of your stupidity is awesome to behold.

worm
04-08-2010, 07:03 AM
I'm quite happy with our return on it.


Just to be clear. You are saying that you are happy with who the Broncos drafted with those fistful of picks they got for Cutler?

nickademus
04-08-2010, 08:13 AM
BTW/ Denbver managed to get good value out of cutler and blew it.

that was a good point after the draft......last year. I am so tired of people whining about A. Smith yea it was a bad move but at least Shanahan never did any of thoes.

JCMElway
04-08-2010, 08:18 AM
Denver got a gift out of Cutler and blew it.

Mock, GET OVER IT. There is a very good chance that Cutler is Jeff George the 2nd; all the talent in the world but a 2-cent head. If '09 indicated anything, McDaniels made the right move shipping him out.

Rohirrim
04-08-2010, 08:26 AM
McDaniels has been great for the health of the Orange Mane. ;D

baja
04-08-2010, 08:59 AM
Mock, GET OVER IT. There is a very good chance that Cutler is Jeff George the 2nd; all the talent in the world but a 2-cent head. If '09 indicated anything, McDaniels made the right move shipping him out.

Except McD was forced by Bowlen to trade Cutler.

Play2win
04-08-2010, 09:04 AM
I actually liked the segment. It seemed just like a few guys sitting around the bar just talking football, better yet talking Broncos Football!! I found it quite refreshing, actually. Get so sick and tired of the normal tripe that comes out on most of these football shows anymore (don't watch them anymore).

Drek
04-08-2010, 09:29 AM
Just to be clear. You are saying that you are happy with who the Broncos drafted with those fistful of picks they got for Cutler?

Very much so, yes.

Ayers is a developmental project and you have to expect growing pains going in, but he contributed year one as an OLB after spending most of college inside at DT. Guy shows a lot of promise.

We then used the Bears 3rd in a trade and I know people like to get all riled up about that move, but if you look at who we took and instead of taking Quinn in the late 2nd, Bruton in the mid-4th, and Olsen in the late 4th we instead took Quinn in the mid-3rd (our pick), Bruton in the mid-3rd (Bears pick) and Olsen in the mid-4th (our pick) would people b**** so much? And if you view it as such that means we took Bruton with the Bears 3rd, who contributed from day one on special teams and has shown good potential in the set defense.

I don't see where the big problem is. We still haven't seen what we're going to do with the 1st we got from Chicago either. And if you want to argue that Smith was effectively that compensation (under the assumption we wouldn't have traded for him if we didn't have an extra 2010 1st) then you also need to adjust the trade based on us picking 11th, not 14th. Or you can just not play revisionist history and wait to see who we take in 2010.

I've been pleased with McDaniels' drafting overall actually. He's generally picked guys around where they where expected to go. The only over pick you can argue is Quinn, and like I said, if they took him and Bruton both in the 3rd people wouldn't b**** nearly as much.

So whats the problem? I have never gotten this short term viewpoint that all the 2009 class are worthless busts.

TheReverend
04-08-2010, 09:46 AM
Unless Alfonso Smith steps it up and turns into a super-stud, the Broncos fanbase will never forgive McD for giving up the first rounder for him. That trade... this year's #1 for (Seattle's) last year's 2nd rounder... was arguably the stupidest thing McD has ever done.

I agree whole heartedly. With the looming CBA situation, it was no secret how strong this 2010 draft class would be either. I can't fathom the logic behind making that move.

snowspot66
04-08-2010, 10:20 AM
Very much so, yes.

Ayers is a developmental project and you have to expect growing pains going in, but he contributed year one as an OLB after spending most of college inside at DT. Guy shows a lot of promise.

We then used the Bears 3rd in a trade and I know people like to get all riled up about that move, but if you look at who we took and instead of taking Quinn in the late 2nd, Bruton in the mid-4th, and Olsen in the late 4th we instead took Quinn in the mid-3rd (our pick), Bruton in the mid-3rd (Bears pick) and Olsen in the mid-4th (our pick) would people b**** so much? And if you view it as such that means we took Bruton with the Bears 3rd, who contributed from day one on special teams and has shown good potential in the set defense.

I don't see where the big problem is. We still haven't seen what we're going to do with the 1st we got from Chicago either. And if you want to argue that Smith was effectively that compensation (under the assumption we wouldn't have traded for him if we didn't have an extra 2010 1st) then you also need to adjust the trade based on us picking 11th, not 14th. Or you can just not play revisionist history and wait to see who we take in 2010.

I've been pleased with McDaniels' drafting overall actually. He's generally picked guys around where they where expected to go. The only over pick you can argue is Quinn, and like I said, if they took him and Bruton both in the 3rd people wouldn't b**** nearly as much.

So whats the problem? I have never gotten this short term viewpoint that all the 2009 class are worthless busts.

Best take I've ever read on that situation. We would have ended up with the same guys no matter what because that is who they wanted. The trade was ultimately irrelevant. It only changed the position of where they were drafted.

Lolad
04-08-2010, 11:10 AM
Very much so, yes.

Ayers is a developmental project and you have to expect growing pains going in, but he contributed year one as an OLB after spending most of college inside at DT. Guy shows a lot of promise.

We then used the Bears 3rd in a trade and I know people like to get all riled up about that move, but if you look at who we took and instead of taking Quinn in the late 2nd, Bruton in the mid-4th, and Olsen in the late 4th we instead took Quinn in the mid-3rd (our pick), Bruton in the mid-3rd (Bears pick) and Olsen in the mid-4th (our pick) would people b**** so much? And if you view it as such that means we took Bruton with the Bears 3rd, who contributed from day one on special teams and has shown good potential in the set defense.

I don't see where the big problem is. We still haven't seen what we're going to do with the 1st we got from Chicago either. And if you want to argue that Smith was effectively that compensation (under the assumption we wouldn't have traded for him if we didn't have an extra 2010 1st) then you also need to adjust the trade based on us picking 11th, not 14th. Or you can just not play revisionist history and wait to see who we take in 2010.

I've been pleased with McDaniels' drafting overall actually. He's generally picked guys around where they where expected to go. The only over pick you can argue is Quinn, and like I said, if they took him and Bruton both in the 3rd people wouldn't b**** nearly as much.

So whats the problem? I have never gotten this short term viewpoint that all the 2009 class are worthless busts.

you're ignoring the fact that the value wasn't there In any of the move ups. We could have stayed where we were and picked up additional players. Even Mcd admitted himself that they weren't fully prepared for the draft. So for you to ignore that point and assume last years draft had no holes in it, I think you're being ignorant.

Yes, you are right to say we can't fully evaluate the players based off of 1 year. But 1st round picks are meant to come in and contribute early. That didn't happen with Smith (he is a #14 overall btw) a position he wouldn't be drafted at.

strafen
04-08-2010, 11:18 AM
Very much so, yes.

Ayers is a developmental project and you have to expect growing pains going in, but he contributed year one as an OLB after spending most of college inside at DT. Guy shows a lot of promise.

We then used the Bears 3rd in a trade and I know people like to get all riled up about that move, but if you look at who we took and instead of taking Quinn in the late 2nd, Bruton in the mid-4th, and Olsen in the late 4th we instead took Quinn in the mid-3rd (our pick), Bruton in the mid-3rd (Bears pick) and Olsen in the mid-4th (our pick) would people b**** so much? And if you view it as such that means we took Bruton with the Bears 3rd, who contributed from day one on special teams and has shown good potential in the set defense.

I don't see where the big problem is. We still haven't seen what we're going to do with the 1st we got from Chicago either. And if you want to argue that Smith was effectively that compensation (under the assumption we wouldn't have traded for him if we didn't have an extra 2010 1st) then you also need to adjust the trade based on us picking 11th, not 14th. Or you can just not play revisionist history and wait to see who we take in 2010.

I've been pleased with McDaniels' drafting overall actually. He's generally picked guys around where they where expected to go. The only over pick you can argue is Quinn, and like I said, if they took him and Bruton both in the 3rd people wouldn't b**** nearly as much.

So whats the problem? I have never gotten this short term viewpoint that all the 2009 class are worthless busts.We didn't need a blocking TE.
We didn't need to have drafted Richard Quinn, period. I don't care if it was in the last round.
This team had major deficiencies on defense. Those were not addressed the way you and I or anybody else for that matter would've expected.
I would have been surprised if Quinn was drafted at all had we not gotten him when we did, and if he was, I doubt it would've been in any early round at all.
That reach-in to get him bothered me a lot.

WolfpackGuy
04-08-2010, 11:22 AM
Even Mcd admitted himself that they weren't fully prepared for the draft.

This bugs more than the actual picks.

strafen
04-08-2010, 11:30 AM
This bugs more than the actual picks.If anything, let's hope something was learned from their mistakes last year...

~Crash~
04-08-2010, 11:31 AM
Wow Cutler's name was only brought up once. If that were Jamie Dukes and Rod Woodson that entire segmant would have been about how dumb McDaniels was for trading away the franchise.

oh yeah BMarsah615 opps I meant soon to be HeadupMcD'sass

strafen
04-08-2010, 11:37 AM
oh yeah BMarsah615 opps I meant soon to be HeadupMcD'sass :rofl: :thumbs:

Eldorado
04-08-2010, 11:44 AM
Uh-oh. My 'creationist ruh'tard' proximity alarm is going off.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_rIZfaHBJWHE/SphO1ctNGeI/AAAAAAAAPeY/YZKZnegJta8/s400/Alert.gif

nickademus
04-08-2010, 11:48 AM
We didn't need a blocking TE.
We didn't need to have drafted Richard Quinn, period. I don't care if it was in the last round.
This team had major deficiencies on defense. Those were not addressed the way you and I or anybody else for that matter would've expected.
I would have been surprised if Quinn was drafted at all had we not gotten him when we did, and if he was, I doubt it would've been in any early round at all.
That reach-in to get him bothered me a lot.

Actually If we hadnt taken Quinn when we did he would have been the first pick of the third by the Jets. I have a relative on their scouting staff who was there for the draft and they were pist we traded up and took him. Worked out well for them though as they got Shon Green instead. Bottom line is Quinn was a guy they wanted to develop so they could get rid of Graham and his insane contract. IMHO it was not a huge need since they didnt get rid of graham and they could have waited and done that this year or next year but I understand the reasoning.

Drek
04-08-2010, 11:52 AM
you're ignoring the fact that the value wasn't there In any of the move ups. We could have stayed where we were and picked up additional players. Even Mcd admitted himself that they weren't fully prepared for the draft. So for you to ignore that point and assume last years draft had no holes in it, I think you're being ignorant.

Yes, you are right to say we can't fully evaluate the players based off of 1 year. But 1st round picks are meant to come in and contribute early. That didn't happen with Smith (he is a #14 overall btw) a position he wouldn't be drafted at.

Every team that makes a transition in the off-season like we did last year is forced to work with under-prepared staff. McDaniels is just honest enough to admit it.

Even still, Quinn is the only guy you can say was a reach. Every other guy was taken relative to where they where expected to go.

And what do you mean by not getting good value for their move ups? They got the guys they wanted and never gave up huge value to do so based on the trade value chart.

I'm not saying it was a perfect draft. But in general we took guys around where they should've gone and consistently got guys the FO liked. People bitch about how all the guys we drafted where worked out by the team and McDaniels' short list of targets, but doesn't that show a pretty high level understanding of draft boards around the league when we knew who would be available where and procured our targets.

If you think they could've done something better then by all means, lets hear where they left value on the table and what they should've done differently. I'd love to hear these moves they left on the table that you where privy to.

We didn't need a blocking TE.
We didn't need to have drafted Richard Quinn, period. I don't care if it was in the last round.
This team had major deficiencies on defense. Those were not addressed the way you and I or anybody else for that matter would've expected.
I would have been surprised if Quinn was drafted at all had we not gotten him when we did, and if he was, I doubt it would've been in any early round at all.
That reach-in to get him bothered me a lot.

We didn't need a blocking TE when our offense heavily relies on a blocking TE as part of our base offensive package? What if Dan Graham breaks a leg or tears an ACL?

And the reason these "major deficiencies" where not addressed on defense is that the talent was simply not there. What stud 3-4 DE or NT did we pass on? It was a bad DL class, especially for 3-4 fronts. Much like last year's FA class. Now when we had a good 3-4 FA class we hit it hard and got three potential starters. Now lets see what McDaniels does in a good 3-4 DL talent draft.

And FYI, Richard Quinn was projected as a 3rd rounder (mid-2nd to early 4th range) by NFL Draft Scout and CBS Sports so he wasn't some massive over-pick who was going to go undrafted if we didn't grab him. Your belief that he would have just underscores your own complete lack of perspective or knowledge of middle round draft prospects. He was a reach but a mild reach to make sure they got him and a perfect fit to replace Daniel Graham when the need arises.

baja
04-08-2010, 12:22 PM
This bugs more than the actual picks.

That was because of the reduced time frame to evaluate and plan not because of any failing on McD's part.

DawnBTVS
04-08-2010, 12:47 PM
Actually If we hadnt taken Quinn when we did he would have been the first pick of the third by the Jets. I have a relative on their scouting staff who was there for the draft and they were pissed we traded up and took him. Worked out well for them though as they got Shonn Greene instead. Bottom line is Quinn was a guy they wanted to develop so they could get rid of Graham and his insane contract. IMHO it was not a huge need since they didn't get rid of Graham and they could have waited and done that this year or next year but I understand the reasoning.

An overlooked post worth quoting IMO. Interesting to see there was at least one team that was going to gamble on Quinn early.

The Broncos take Quinn at 2.32, the very pick before the New York Jets. Quinn obviously would have never made it to the Broncos' 3.15 pick nor their 3.20 pick.

They also grabbed G Seth Olsen with the 4.32 pick they also acquired from Pittsburgh but that gets overlooked.

It's also a reflection that contrary to the thought process, just because a guy has a certain grade doesn't mean all teams will let that player fall there. Most draft day trades involving teams moving up are specifically done because they know (more likely than not) that another team wants the player they're eyeing. So they can either trade up and get who they want or see him go off the board.

Dedhed
04-08-2010, 12:54 PM
This bugs more than the actual picks.

Are you naive enough to believe anyone could be fully prepared for the draft in 3 months?

Cito Pelon
04-08-2010, 05:38 PM
Very much so, yes.

Ayers is a developmental project and you have to expect growing pains going in, but he contributed year one as an OLB after spending most of college inside at DT. Guy shows a lot of promise.

We then used the Bears 3rd in a trade and I know people like to get all riled up about that move, but if you look at who we took and instead of taking Quinn in the late 2nd, Bruton in the mid-4th, and Olsen in the late 4th we instead took Quinn in the mid-3rd (our pick), Bruton in the mid-3rd (Bears pick) and Olsen in the mid-4th (our pick) would people b**** so much? And if you view it as such that means we took Bruton with the Bears 3rd, who contributed from day one on special teams and has shown good potential in the set defense.

I don't see where the big problem is. We still haven't seen what we're going to do with the 1st we got from Chicago either. And if you want to argue that Smith was effectively that compensation (under the assumption we wouldn't have traded for him if we didn't have an extra 2010 1st) then you also need to adjust the trade based on us picking 11th, not 14th. Or you can just not play revisionist history and wait to see who we take in 2010.

I've been pleased with McDaniels' drafting overall actually. He's generally picked guys around where they where expected to go. The only over pick you can argue is Quinn, and like I said, if they took him and Bruton both in the 3rd people wouldn't b**** nearly as much.

So whats the problem? I have never gotten this short term viewpoint that all the 2009 class are worthless busts.

This is a good point, but waaaay too complicated for some people to follow.

I have some concerns about the 2009 draft, but we'll have to see how they play this year.

Moreno should be fine.

I was disappointed in Ayers since I thought he'd transition well to the 3-4. He didn't show change of direction skills when he dropped back and didn't attack the OT's all that well either when he rushed.

Now Phonz, he's probably better suited to playing outside rather than nickle CB, but that's just my guess. I hope he comes on strong this year. I think someone on the D staff wanted him badly, so they did the trade. It was no doubt a head-scratcher trade, though.

Quinn, IIRC, the FO might have got worked a little bit by some team throwing a rumor out there they were gonna grab Quinn in the 3rd, thereby causing Denver to overdraft him a bit. But, for draftpoints it was an equal trade.

McBath, he was probably a good pick where they got him, maybe overdrafted a little bit.

Bruton, he was a good pick where they got him.

Olsen, we'll have to see how he pans out, he might turn out to be an excellent value pick.

IMO, there was some over-drafting. I really wanted the team to grab Paul Kruger in the 2nd.

Summary, Ayers, Phonz, Quinn need to contribute more for it to be a great draft. If all three turn out to be solid starters, then it was a great draft. Right now it's merely average.

baja
04-08-2010, 05:42 PM
Moreno needs to be a top 5 back too to make that draft.

Drek
04-08-2010, 05:46 PM
This is a good point, but waaaay too complicated for some people to follow.

I have some concerns about the 2009 draft, but we'll have to see how they play this year.

Moreno should be fine.

I was disappointed in Ayers since I thought he'd transition well to the 3-4. He didn't show change of direction skills when he dropped back and didn't attack the OT's all that well either when he rushed.

Now Phonz, he's probably better suited to playing outside rather than nickle CB, but that's just my guess. I hope he comes on strong this year. I think someone on the D staff wanted him badly, so they did the trade. It was no doubt a head-scratcher trade, though.

Quinn, IIRC, the FO might have got worked a little bit by some team throwing a rumor out there they were gonna grab Quinn in the 3rd, thereby causing Denver to overdraft him a bit. But, for draftpoints it was an equal trade.

McBath, he was probably a good pick where they got him, maybe overdrafted a little bit.

Bruton, he was a good pick where they got him.

Olsen, we'll have to see how he pans out, he might turn out to be an excellent value pick.

IMO, there was some over-drafting. I really wanted the team to grab Paul Kruger in the 2nd.

Summary, Ayers, Phonz, Quinn need to contribute more for it to be a great draft. If all three turn out to be solid starters, then it was a great draft. Right now it's merely average.

I'm not saying it was a great draft, just that the guys where all talent relatively close to where they where projected.

There where no Willie Middlebrooks, Marcus Nash, Darius Watts, etc. type picks that where grossly overpicking guys just because we liked them and apparently didn't get the concept of draft board value.

You can see the rationale behind all the picks. They might not pan out but that is the risk you take. But they are all guys who fit what McDaniels is trying to do and none are just freakish reaches.

Cito Pelon
04-08-2010, 05:48 PM
I agree whole heartedly. With the looming CBA situation, it was no secret how strong this 2010 draft class would be either. I can't fathom the logic behind making that move.

I think someone on the D staff wanted Phonz badly, and McXanders accommodated the wish. They played pretty loose with a 2010 #1, there's no doubt about that.

broncolife
04-08-2010, 06:13 PM
Broncos on the clock Nfl.com

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-draft/09000d5d81769d4e/On-the-Clock-Broncos

Cito Pelon
04-08-2010, 06:22 PM
I'm not saying it was a great draft, just that the guys where all talent relatively close to where they where projected.

There where no Willie Middlebrooks, Marcus Nash, Darius Watts, etc. type picks that where grossly overpicking guys just because we liked them and apparently didn't get the concept of draft board value.

You can see the rationale behind all the picks. They might not pan out but that is the risk you take. But they are all guys who fit what McDaniels is trying to do and none are just freakish reaches.

Agreed.

The Phonz trade of a 2010 #1 is the one that could be an irritant for years to come. I hate to put that kind of pressure on the kid, but they gave up a potentially damn good draftee for The Phonz. He could turn out to be golden once he's learned the ropes and those two old-timers Champ and Goodman fade.

I'm not terribly disappointed about the 2009 draft since I think like yourself, that the safeties were not pushed to take a starting spot, but were drafted to work themselves into the lineup as Hill and Dawkins fade. McBath and Bruton are certainly fast, strong, aggressive, athletic.

Quinn, I think he'll be an adequate TE, maybe overdrafted a bit, but not a reach since the trade was for equal value. I thought the team missed a gem in Paul Kruger in the 2nd, though.

And Olsen could turn out to be a gem, but was worked into the lineup slowly.

Also, the ST's badly needed an infusion of young blood. People often forget how important ST coverage and return units are.

I forgot all about Kenny McKinley. He could still turn out to be a solid player for years as a returner and WR.

Rohirrim
04-08-2010, 06:29 PM
Agreed.

The Phonz trade of a 2010 #1 is the one that could be an irritant for years to come. I hate to put that kind of pressure on the kid, but they gave up a potentially damn good draftee for The Phonz. He could turn out to be golden once he's learned the ropes and those two old-timers Champ and Goodman fade.

I'm not terribly disappointed about the 2009 draft since I think like yourself, that the safeties were not pushed to take a starting spot, but were drafted to work themselves into the lineup as Hill and Dawkins fade. McBath and Bruton are certainly fast, strong, aggressive, athletic.

Quinn, I think he'll be an adequate TE, maybe overdrafted a bit, but not a reach since the trade was for equal value. I thought the team missed a gem in Paul Kruger in the 2nd, though.

And Olsen could turn out to be a gem, but was worked into the lineup slowly.

Also, the ST's badly needed an infusion of young blood. People often forget how important ST coverage and return units are.

I forgot all about Kenny McKinley. He could still turn out to be a solid player for years as a returner and WR.

I just hope that #14 pick doesn't end up being a pro-bowler and HOFer. We'd never hear the end of it. Anyway, it was the dumbest move McD has made so far, IMO.

Cito Pelon
04-08-2010, 06:40 PM
Moreno needs to be a top 5 back too to make that draft.

So some people say. I like him. I think he'll be a solid, productive, versatile back with a nose for the endzone for 8-10 years. Bob Turner absolutely loved him. I liked his work around the endzone in 2009, he has the knack.

tsiguy96
04-08-2010, 06:54 PM
Broncos on the clock Nfl.com

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-draft/09000d5d81769d4e/On-the-Clock-Broncos

let me guess...woodson and dukes sound something like this:

"that idiot stupidhead is gonna need a wide receiver since marshall is GONE. they will also need a QB since poopyhead traded cutler, hes single handedly destroying the team!"

Cito Pelon
04-08-2010, 07:14 PM
I just hope that #14 pick doesn't end up being a pro-bowler and HOFer. We'd never hear the end of it. Anyway, it was the dumbest move McD has made so far, IMO.

Well, I think someone on the D staff was pushing for Alphonso hard, and McXanders just accommodated that person. The D was a focus last year early despite what some people say. Heck, 3 of the first 4 picks were for D players - Ayers, Phonz, McBath. Moreno was the lone O-player drafted in the first 4 picks.

Yah, it was certainly playing loose with the 2010 #1, IMO.

Drek
04-08-2010, 08:06 PM
I just hope that #14 pick doesn't end up being a pro-bowler and HOFer. We'd never hear the end of it. Anyway, it was the dumbest move McD has made so far, IMO.

I'd agree, I never like giving up future picks for later picks in the next year. I hated it when Shanahan gave up a 3rd and our entire 2nd day to get Marcus Thomas, and I hated it when McDaniels gave up a future 1st to get Smith.

But I don't hold it against Smith the player, and acknowledge the fact that despite a lack of rookie year production he was still widely ranked as a late 1st/early 2nd round CB with a skillset you won't find in many of this year's CBs (he actually catches the damn football).

But that one trade was technically a fair value move (by what teams who have traded future 1sts have always gotten in return) and we then used it to take a guy who was a good value selection for where we picked him.

That is all you can ask from a front office. Success or failure of draftees after the fact is first and foremost that player's own responsibility. If a team keeps drafting guys who don't put the work in then sure, you can get on the organization for that. But the number top mistakes bad drafting teams do are over selecting their pet projects and drafting by need/perceived potential instead of drafting the best player available who fits your system. We did neither last year.

WolfpackGuy
04-08-2010, 08:18 PM
Are you naive enough to believe anyone could be fully prepared for the draft in 3 months?

Sadly, it was less than 3 months since the Goodmans were canned in late Feb 2009 which makes that unprepared admission even more embarassing.

Who knows how much the draftboard changed after those firings?

I just don't understand that if you're not prepared, trade down and/or into the following season(s).

Punisher
04-08-2010, 08:20 PM
dez bryant at 11

Rock Chalk
04-08-2010, 09:11 PM
I'm talking about our 2#1's and 2 #2's.

You dimwit, Billickeck was busy loading up on NG's and second rounders.

Go check.

Did you know that from 2007-2008 in those two drafts New England has exactly one remaining on their roster?

Just saying.

baja
04-08-2010, 09:15 PM
are the rest out of the league?

DawnBTVS
04-09-2010, 10:51 AM
Moreno needs to be a top 5 back too to make that draft.

Here's a question not just to you, Baja, but to everybody on the board. What defines value/worthiness of a pick?

Here it's mentioned that Moreno should be a Top 5 RB in the NFL. He was taken at pick 1.12 and was the 1st RB off the board in the 2009 Draft.

Robert Ayers went at 1.18 and was the 6th (if you count DE converting to LB) LB taken in the 2009 NFL Draft. So does he have to be a Top 5 LB to make the selection worth it at 1.18 or would being a Top 15 LB be good enough since he was only the 6th LB selected?

I guess my overall question is: Do you weigh the value of a pick on the overall pick (just the round?) or the number of players picked at the position before said player was taken? A guy taken late 1st Round after 5 other QBs would have a different value in comparison to a guy taken in the late 1st Round after 1 other QB was taken.

The 1983 Draft best value QB would be Dan Marino. Went 1.27 and was the 6th QB. So he probably had SB Titles/HOF expectations but probably not to the height of say John Elway or Jim Kelly. Similar to say Aaron Rodgers. Expected to have a great career, maybe win a SB or two, but won't be labeled as much of a bust if he doesn't do it compared to say Alex Smith in SF.

baja
04-09-2010, 11:12 AM
I really don't understand your question (post 85)

Requiem
04-09-2010, 11:17 AM
He is asking you what defines a worthy pick.

Moreno had 9 touchdowns and ~ 1,200 all purpose yards in his rookie year with the team. He was third in points behind Prater and Marshall, and arguably one of our best offensive weapons. Does he have to be a premier back to justify the selection? I don't know. I expect improvement, but if he hovers around that mark (and does better rushing) for his time with the Broncos, I would say that his production merited the selection.

baja
04-09-2010, 11:23 AM
He is asking you what defines a worthy pick.

Moreno had 9 touchdowns and ~ 1,200 all purpose yards in his rookie year with the team. He was third in points behind Prater and Marshall, and arguably one of our best offensive weapons. Does he have to be a premier back to justify the selection? I don't know. I expect improvement, but if he hovers around that mark (and does better rushing) for his time with the Broncos, I would say that his production merited the selection.

No he is using the same criteria regardless of the position.

My point is when you take a Running back at 1.12 because of the position he plays he needs to be a top 5 back in the league to make the pick solid. A QB on the other hand if he is top 10 than you hit a HR. expectations are tied to the position

underrated29
04-09-2010, 11:27 AM
Moreno will be a top 5 back...No doubt about it.

Beantown Bronco
04-09-2010, 11:49 AM
IMO, it's too hard to actually nail down the top 5 backs for more than one season's worth of work. They are too reliant on their blocking and overall offensive schemes IMO to truly rank them with any accuracy. There is a reason that no more than one or two names ever consistently crack the top 5 yardage leaders over the course of any multi-year period. It's not because the guys all of a sudden decide to suck. It's because their production is based on too many outside factors beyond their control.

Requiem
04-09-2010, 11:50 AM
No he is using the same criteria regardless of the position.

My point is when you take a Running back at 1.12 because of the position he plays he needs to be a top 5 back in the league to make the pick solid. A QB on the other hand if he is top 10 than you hit a HR. expectations are tied to the position

I don't think Moreno has to be a top five back in the league to merit being selected where he did. Given McDaniels' offense, I don't expect Moreno to rush for 1,500+ or huge yardage like you have seen from Peterson, Johnson, etc. He's going to be used in a rotation. He'll see plenty of opportunities to run and catch passes out of the backfield. I don't think you'll see a time in his career where he'll be getting a solid 300+ carries on a regular basis.

He's still incredibly young and has a lot of growth potential. I think Moreno can be a ~ 1,500 all-purpose yard back in this offense, if not more, with good touchdown totals for his career. I think he will be a Pro-Bowl player at some point in time. People have high expectations, and I understand why, but given our offensive line situation last year (blocking) and his transition to the NFL at such a young age with little collegiate experience, I think he fared well.

Nothing but good things for him moving forward. He will be a special player for us.

Requiem
04-09-2010, 11:52 AM
IMO, it's too hard to actually nail down the top 5 backs for more than one season's worth of work. They are too reliant on their blocking and overall offensive schemes IMO to truly rank them with any accuracy. There is a reason that no more than one or two names ever consistently crack the top 5 yardage leaders over the course of any multi-year period. It's not because the guys all of a sudden decide to suck. It's because their production is based on too many outside factors beyond their control.

Very true. I agree here, especially with the last sentence. Moreno has earned and will continue to be able to progress in his role on the roster, but given the way McDaniels' offense uses running backs in different manners, I just don't expect the huge numbers like some are really hoping for. I think if Moreno gets 250-275 carries a year along with ample opportunities to catch the ball -- we are doing just fine. I'd rather him be fresh and healthy than being beat into the ground. Protecting the investment we have in him is key, and overusing him early on would be troublesome. He definitely hit a wall last year. We don't need that happening again.

baja
04-09-2010, 11:53 AM
I don't think Moreno has to be a top five back in the league to merit being selected where he did. Given McDaniels' offense, I don't expect Moreno to rush for 1,500+ or huge yardage like you have seen from Peterson, Johnson, etc. He's going to be used in a rotation. He'll see plenty of opportunities to run and catch passes out of the backfield. I don't think you'll see a time in his career where he'll be getting a solid 300+ carries on a regular basis.

He's still incredibly young and has a lot of growth potential. I think Moreno can be a ~ 1,500 all-purpose yard back in this offense, if not more, with good touchdown totals for his career. I think he will be a Pro-Bowl player at some point in time. People have high expectations, and I understand why, but given our offensive line situation last year (blocking) and his transition to the NFL at such a young age with little collegiate experience, I think he fared well.

Nothing but good things for him moving forward. He will be a special player for us.

Well if he is a pro bowler than he will be a top 5 back

crush17
04-09-2010, 12:19 PM
what pro bowl running back did the Saints or Colts have on their roster last season?

that's what I thought.

Beantown Bronco
04-09-2010, 12:19 PM
Well if he is a pro bowler than he will be a top 5 back

Not necessarily, given the way the probowl is now scheduled. Too many top guys now sit out and allow guys like David Gerrard to get in there, even though he's not even a top 15 QB.

baja
04-09-2010, 12:28 PM
Not necessarily, given the way the probowl is now scheduled. Too many top guys now sit out and allow guys like David Gerrard to get in there, even though he's not even a top 15 QB.

Oh you mean like Jay Cutler that one time?

DawnBTVS
04-09-2010, 01:54 PM
No he is using the same criteria regardless of the position.

My point is when you take a Running back at 1.12 because of the position he plays he needs to be a top 5 back in the league to make the pick solid. A QB on the other hand if he is top 10 than you hit a HR. expectations are tied to the position

Correct and part of it was because of your answer.

Your argument is that a RB at 1.12 has to be a Top 5 RB (in rushing yardage I assume?). So he'd have to be Top 5 out of roughly 40 RBs if you include some of the RB 2s into the list.

For a QB taken with the same selection, you said that being Top 10 is fine. So that QB would be Top 10 out of 32 (or 40 depending on backups).

Top 5 RB Last Year: ADP 314 Carries - 1383 Yards - 18 TD - 4.4 YPC
Top 10 QB Last Year: Eli Manning 317/509 - 4021 Yards - 27 TD vs. 14 INT

There were 15 RBs over 1,000 yards in comparison to 17 QBs over 3,500 yards passing last year. Rating wise, there were only 12 QBs over a 90.0 Passer Rating.

Just seems that it's harder to find a great QB so the expectations should seem to be reversed... a QB selection at 1.12 should be expected as Top 5 whereas a RB should be Top 10.

As for positions like DE/DT/LB, etc. I figured that most of the best players tend to go in the 1st round. So if they go in the 1st Round, expectations are that they should be at or near the Top 5-10 of their position. At the same time, a 1st Round DE taken as the 5th DE in the draft would be expected to be around Top 10 as opposed to the 1st DE taken due to the idea that the 1st DE was taken by a team that needs him to have a Star career more.

baja
04-09-2010, 01:57 PM
Cutler was taken at 11 was that a good pick for us?

DawnBTVS
04-09-2010, 02:02 PM
Cutler was taken at 11 was that a good pick for us?

Record wise as a starter, he went 7-9 and 8-8 so by that example, no.

Statistically, he finished 12th in QB Rating in 2007 and 16th in QB Rating in 2008 so he drastically underwhelmed in that regard.

So I'd argue no, he wasn't a good pick. While he was the 3rd QB taken, he was taken at 1.11 so the expectations were for a lot more than .500 records and middle of the pack QB Rating numbers (ignoring the impact of the rest of team, which I understand had a massive effect).

If you want to throw in the trade and what's was gotten/given away, that could change things (See the Cowboys trading Herschel Walker. Had 1 great season but it was the draft picks that he netted that could be argue he was a "good pick" since they may not have gotten all of those picks if they never drafted Walker)

It's the same reason Alex Smith is/was labeled a bust because he went 1.01 with high expectations of him compared to Kyle Orton who went 4.05. The expectations on Orton were largely, "It'd be great if he becomes a backup and maybe a starter down the road. If he makes the playoffs, great but we're not expecting Super Bowls and a Hall of Fame career."

WolfpackGuy
04-09-2010, 02:17 PM
Cutler was taken at 11 was that a good pick for us?

Yes

TheReverend
04-09-2010, 02:27 PM
Oh you mean like Jay Cutler that one time?

No one had to sit for him to get in, actually.

baja
04-09-2010, 02:37 PM
No one had to sit for him to get in, actually.

He was an alternate was he not?

Blueflame
04-09-2010, 02:45 PM
He was an alternate was he not?

No, he wasn't. The Pro Bowl QB who was an alternate (got in because the QB who was originally chosen... Rivers, I think... was injured) that year was Kerry Collins.

bronco militia
04-09-2010, 02:47 PM
he was an alternate was he not?

no

WolfpackGuy
04-09-2010, 02:48 PM
I'm pretty sure Cutler was #3 behind Manning and Favre.

baja
04-09-2010, 02:51 PM
No he backed in I remember.

bronco militia
04-09-2010, 02:52 PM
No he backed in I remember.

you are mistaken

Dagmar
04-09-2010, 02:53 PM
you are mistaken

http://i44.tinypic.com/vzf1ad.png

That's the 2009 pro bowl, I posted 2008.

baja
04-09-2010, 02:54 PM
Their immediate futures were clouded nine months ago.

Brandon Marshall was wearing a cumbersome cast on his right arm after delicate surgery, and Jay Cutler had just discovered he had developed type 1 diabetes.

The degree of their turnarounds was reflected by both Broncos players' selections to the Pro Bowl on Tuesday in a combined vote of fans, coaches and NFL peers.

"I knew Jay would," Marshall said. "With me, they didn't know how the nerve was going to heal up, but it did. And I'm blessed to be here."

Added Cutler: "I think everyone goes through trials and tribulations. You've got a find a way through it."

Marshall will start the Feb. 8 All-Star game in Honolulu alongside Houston Texans receiver Andre Johnson, with Indianapolis' Reggie Wayne and New England's Wes Welker in reserve.

Cutler, along with the New York Jets' Brett Favre, will back up the Colts' Peyton Manning.

OK he did make it but not as a starter.

CEH
04-09-2010, 03:07 PM
IMO,

When you get 2 and a half times as much as your original draft slot and have several teams lining up to bid I think you are worth the pick even if you were not the current regime selection

I'm not a big fan of QB rating. I like to look obviously at wins (leadership) then 3rd down % and yard per pass attempt. Shanny use to say the QB makes his living on 3rd down.

Cutler in '08 was superior to most in categories 2 and 3 and average in #1

Blueflame
04-09-2010, 03:11 PM
http://i44.tinypic.com/vzf1ad.png

That's the 2009 pro bowl, I posted 2008.

IIRC, the original 3 Pro Bowl picks were Manning, Cutler, and Favre. Favre was banged up and bowed out, so then Rivers had the opportunity but he was also injured, hence Collins got the nod.

TheReverend
04-09-2010, 03:12 PM
Their immediate futures were clouded nine months ago.

Brandon Marshall was wearing a cumbersome cast on his right arm after delicate surgery, and Jay Cutler had just discovered he had developed type 1 diabetes.

The degree of their turnarounds was reflected by both Broncos players' selections to the Pro Bowl on Tuesday in a combined vote of fans, coaches and NFL peers.

"I knew Jay would," Marshall said. "With me, they didn't know how the nerve was going to heal up, but it did. And I'm blessed to be here."

Added Cutler: "I think everyone goes through trials and tribulations. You've got a find a way through it."

Marshall will start the Feb. 8 All-Star game in Honolulu alongside Houston Texans receiver Andre Johnson, with Indianapolis' Reggie Wayne and New England's Wes Welker in reserve.

Cutler, along with the New York Jets' Brett Favre, will back up the Colts' Peyton Manning.

OK he did make it but not as a starter.

In a conference with Brady and Manning, the AFC Probowl starting QB is also usually the league MVP, and in recent history has come combined with broken records....

BMarsh615
04-09-2010, 03:22 PM
No he backed in I remember.


Brady got hurt and Rivers and Roethlisburger were snubbed. That is how Jay got into the Pro Bowl.

baja
04-09-2010, 03:23 PM
In a conference with Brady and Manning, the AFC Probowl starting QB is also usually the league MVP, and in recent history has come combined with broken records....


Yes you would have to have one hell of a year to unseat one of those two.

I doubt if Cutler will make another pro bowl unless he gets a good coach and excepts the coaching.

Blueflame
04-09-2010, 03:24 PM
Brady got hurt and Rivers and Roethlisburger were snubbed. That is how Jay got into the Pro Bowl.

Um... no. That is how Kerry Collins got into the Pro Bowl. Cutler and Manning were voted in.

BMarsh615
04-09-2010, 03:33 PM
Um... no. That is how Kerry Collins got into the Pro Bowl. Cutler and Manning were voted in.

Would he have been voted in if Brady didn't get hurt week 1? Do you think he would have gone in if the fan vote didn't close early? Remember the Chargers were 4 games behind Denver with 4 games to go by the time the fan vote closed.

TheReverend
04-09-2010, 03:50 PM
Would he have been voted in if Brady didn't get hurt week 1? Do you think he would have gone in if the fan vote didn't close early? Remember the Chargers were 4 games behind Denver with 4 games to go by the time the fan vote closed.

Rivers for sure deserved to go... over Favre.

Blueflame
04-09-2010, 04:09 PM
Would he have been voted in if Brady didn't get hurt week 1? Do you think he would have gone in if the fan vote didn't close early? Remember the Chargers were 4 games behind Denver with 4 games to go by the time the fan vote closed.

Cutler wasn't an "injury replacement" for the originally-chosen player; he was actually voted in. It sucks for Tom Brady that he was injured in Week One, but the possibility of injuries is a part of the sport of football. While it's likely that Brady would have played well enough for Pro Bowl consideration if the injury hadn't happened, he wasn't on the field enough to count. There was one AFC QB that year who only got in because the originally-selected player was injured and that QB was Collins, not Cutler.

Ambiguous
04-09-2010, 04:20 PM
Yes you would have to have one hell of a year to unseat one of those two.

I doubt if Cutler will make another pro bowl unless he gets a good coach and excepts the coaching.

Oh, the irony. :)

WolfpackGuy
04-09-2010, 04:49 PM
It doesn't matter.

Nobody (outside of SD) was saying Cutler was undeserving of the Pro Bowl in 2008 before the whole trade debacle.

baja
04-09-2010, 04:51 PM
I honestly did not think he deserved to be there

I would have never admitted it back then but I thought Rivers deserved it more.

BMarsh615
04-09-2010, 04:52 PM
Cutler wasn't an "injury replacement" for the originally-chosen player; he was actually voted in. It sucks for Tom Brady that he was injured in Week One, but the possibility of injuries is a part of the sport of football. While it's likely that Brady would have played well enough for Pro Bowl consideration if the injury hadn't happened, he wasn't on the field enough to count. There was one AFC QB that year who only got in because the originally-selected player was injured and that QB was Collins, not Cutler.


I know Cutler wasn't an injury replacement. My argument is that he wouldn't have made it with a healthy Brady playing the whole season and if Rivers and Roethlisburger didn't get snubbed.

tsiguy96
04-09-2010, 04:59 PM
I know Cutler wasn't an injury replacement. My argument is that he wouldn't have made it with a healthy Brady playing the whole season and if Rivers and Roethlisburger didn't get snubbed.

remember what he did in the pro bowl? chance to win the game for the AFC...and threw a pick

WolfpackGuy
04-09-2010, 05:04 PM
I honestly did not think he deserved to be there

I would have never admitted it back then but I thought Rivers deserved it more.

If anybody didn't deserve to be there, it was Favre.

He was awful when not playing the Rams or Cardinals.

Blueflame
04-09-2010, 05:19 PM
I know Cutler wasn't an injury replacement. My argument is that he wouldn't have made it with a healthy Brady playing the whole season and if Rivers and Roethlisburger didn't get snubbed.

But that point is moot because Brady wasn't healthy... and didn't both Rivers and Roethlisberger bow out (before the AFC finally settled on Collins) due to injuries? Seems to me they did, but it's been a while ago so I could be mistaken. Still, logic says they both would have been taken before Collins if they had wanted/been healthy enough to play.

And Favre was only there on past accomplishments.... his tenure with the Jest was unremarkable.

crush17
04-09-2010, 05:20 PM
who.
effing.
cares.

Blueflame
04-09-2010, 05:54 PM
who.
effing.
cares.

You apparently cared enough to post.... :P

tsiguy96
04-09-2010, 05:56 PM
the fact taht we have to debate whether our former whiny QB made it to the pro bowl legitimately sorta tells you the truth. no one debates that doom, champ or marshall deserved to go to pro bowl, because they were TRUE pro bowl players...

Blueflame
04-09-2010, 06:05 PM
the fact taht we have to debate whether our former whiny QB made it to the pro bowl legitimately sorta tells you the truth. no one debates that doom, champ or marshall deserved to go to pro bowl, because they were TRUE pro bowl players...

What it tells you is that a certain percentage of the Broncos fanbase is still harboring a blind hatred for him and is even willing to engage in revisionist history in order to minimize his achievements.

There's enough to carp about... legitimately criticize him for... without making stuff up, guys.

baja
04-09-2010, 06:06 PM
What it tells you is that a certain percentage of the Broncos fanbase is still harboring a blind hatred for Josh McDaniels and is even willing to engage in revisionist history in order to minimize his achievements.

There's enough to carp about... legitimately criticize him for... without making stuff up, guys.

fixed it for ya

Blueflame
04-09-2010, 06:09 PM
fixed it for ya

Not every thread on the Mane is about McDaniels, Baja... ;D

(Ha! :rofl: :giggle: )

TheReverend
04-09-2010, 08:03 PM
fixed it for ya

Doubtful. Everything he's achieved he's gotten universal praise for. Like his defensive coaching staff was remarkable last year, and I lauded him immediately for it, and they were even more impressive than I could've imagined.

Everyone credits him for the successful draft picks but are pretty much universally wary of the questionable ones.

And for the most part, the offense was disappointing. On one hand, we can expect some fallout transitioning from one O-genius's scheme to another, but on the other hand we can expect an extremely young and talented core of players to progress as the game slows down for them from year to year. And we know for a fact that some weapons were underutilized as McD himself admitted as much.

So what isn't he getting credit for?

He's done some things extremely well. Others iffy. Some downright poor.

baja
04-09-2010, 08:26 PM
Doubtful. Everything he's achieved he's gotten universal praise for. Like his defensive coaching staff was remarkable last year, and I lauded him immediately for it, and they were even more impressive than I could've imagined.

Everyone credits him for the successful draft picks but are pretty much universally wary of the questionable ones.

And for the most part, the offense was disappointing. On one hand, we can expect some fallout transitioning from one O-genius's scheme to another, but on the other hand we can expect an extremely young and talented core of players to progress as the game slows down for them from year to year. And we know for a fact that some weapons were underutilized as McD himself admitted as much.

So what isn't he getting credit for?

He's done some things extremely well. Others iffy. Some downright poor.

You are right actually. fans are coming around in support of McD. They are seeing some things that make them hopeful. I see you have made quite a shift in your opinion of him. I'm just grateful we have a good (maybe great) young coach and a front office that knows how build a team

TheReverend
04-09-2010, 08:32 PM
You are right actually. fans are coming around in support of McD. They are seeing some things that make them hopeful. I see you have made quite a shift in your opinion of him. I'm just grateful we have a good (maybe great) young coach and a front office that knows how build a team

Not particularly.

When he got hired I loved him.

When he put his defensive coaching staff together I loved him more.

When he put his offensive coaching staff together, I gave squinty eyes.

When the Goodman's were fired, I gave googly eyes.

When he traded cutler, I gave angry eyes.

When he won the first six games I said, holy balls, look at this guy go.

When he went 2-8 from there out... well I'm back to square one. Idk what to think of him.

Time will tell. But when he was winning, he got credit. When he was losing, he got criticism. That's how it goes... there's no anti-McD conspiracy... no slow shift... win games and be loved. Lose them and be hated. Period.

Cool Breeze
04-09-2010, 09:04 PM
Hopefully after this draft we look at him with love in our eyes...

It beats the alternative:
http://rookery2.worth1000.com/storagev12/1136500/1136962_c127_625x1000.jpg

baja
04-09-2010, 11:17 PM
Not particularly.

When he got hired I loved him.

When he put his defensive coaching staff together I loved him more.

When he put his offensive coaching staff together, I gave squinty eyes.

When the Goodman's were fired, I gave googly eyes.

When he traded cutler, I gave angry eyes.

When he won the first six games I said, holy balls, look at this guy go.

When he went 2-8 from there out... well I'm back to square one. Idk what to think of him.

Time will tell. But when he was winning, he got credit. When he was losing, he got criticism. That's how it goes... there's no anti-McD conspiracy... no slow shift... win games and be loved. Lose them and be hated. Period.

I see your point but I still think there also has a steady well spring of support for Josh which is not that hard to do considering how poorly he started his tenure.

Blueflame
04-10-2010, 03:08 AM
You are right actually. fans are coming around in support of McD. They are seeing some things that make them hopeful. I see you have made quite a shift in your opinion of him. I'm just grateful we have a good (maybe great) young coach and a front office that knows how build a team

Um... if this is true, then why are the Denver locals (like OSKIE!!! and Montrose) saying that McDaniels is roughly as popular as Philip Rivers in Denver? The only thing that's gonna truly make the fans come around is wins....

baja
04-10-2010, 08:03 AM
Um... if this is true, then why are the Denver locals (like OSKIE!!! and Montrose) saying that McDaniels is roughly as popular as Philip Rivers in Denver? The only thing that's gonna truly make the fans come around is wins....

You mean if a coach wins he is more popular, what a novel concept!

Dagmar
04-10-2010, 08:17 AM
Um... if this is true, then why are the Denver locals (like OSKIE!!! and Montrose) saying that McDaniels is roughly as popular as Philip Rivers in Denver? The only thing that's gonna truly make the fans come around is wins....

No ****ing chance. People HATE Phillip Rivers. Lots of people are skeptical of McDaniels and a few still harbour hatred for him because he traded Cutler but no chance that is true. Many like him though. You really think the above is how Denver fans think of Rivers? I spend most of my time in Denver too.

DenverBrit
04-10-2010, 08:39 AM
Um... if this is true, then why are the Denver locals (like OSKIE!!! and Montrose) saying that McDaniels is roughly as popular as Philip Rivers in Denver? The only thing that's gonna truly make the fans come around is wins....

There are plenty of people who still can't forgive McDs part in the Cutler mess, but most don't give a sh*t.

The majority of fans in Denver are still optimistic, watching and waiting.

They're Broncos fans first and want to win regardless of coach or players.

Comparing the popularity of Rivers with anyone from the Broncos organization is just silly. IMO

TheReverend
04-10-2010, 10:48 AM
I see your point but I still think there also has a steady well spring of support for Josh which is not that hard to do considering how poorly he started his tenure.

Poorly may/may not be accurate. Turbulent certainly is and the animosity is a direct result of that until he proves his methods to be the right ones. It's the nature of the game and unfortunately, the vast majority of new head coaches never become successful in this league.

baja
04-10-2010, 01:09 PM
Poorly may/may not be accurate. Turbulent certainly is and the animosity is a direct result of that until he proves his methods to be the right ones. It's the nature of the game and unfortunately, the vast majority of new head coaches never become successful in this league.

You're right, turbulent is a better word choice. I will chose my words more carefully from now on. ;D

TheReverend
04-10-2010, 03:03 PM
You're right, turbulent is a better word choice. I will chose my words more carefully from now on. ;D

Well I personally feel like it was a poor start, but I could be wrong. I doubt it, but it's possible. :)