PDA

View Full Version : Only one conclusion possible.....


chrisp
04-25-2010, 12:47 AM
.......we like our linebackers!!

Only one street free agent I can see so far, plus one 9-year vet from Miami. Not what you'd call a 'position of need....'

I honestly thought this position would be addressed more comprehensively than it has been, but if the Broncos coaches like they guys they have, and feel that the d-line was more to blame for our collapse and running woes last year then fair enough...not complaining but I am surprised.

I believe this also means that we have a lot of faith in Ayers on the other outside spot, which I'm on board with - its wrong to see him as a primary pass rusher, he's more a front-seven all-rounder and I think he'll do a solid job there, particularly against the run.

Just to re-emphasise: this is not a "sky is falling thread" saying that we desperately needed to address the LB position and I'm upset....just saying that I thought we would - the fact that we didn't give it more attention may mean that we're happy with the current crop, which could be good news...

i4jelway7
04-25-2010, 05:17 AM
broncos had planned to address the situation in the draft, however the chuggers jumped in front of the broncos in the 3rd round to take LB Donald Bulter... that was Den's target... ILB is going to be a weak postion on this team unless they can sign someone who gets cut

The Joker
04-25-2010, 06:18 AM
What it boils down to is that the SILB position is not all that important, I certainly would not have wanted us spending a first round selection on it anyway with the other areas of the team that needed addressing.

We need a big, physical guy who will get in there and take on blocks and do the dirty work. A stout run defender who will do his job and then get off the field on 3rd down. I have faith that one of Haggan, Ayodele and Larsen will manage that in a competent fashion.

The WILB is where you want someone who is more of an athletic playmaker, and we have DJ there with Woodyard backing him up, that seems fine to me.

ColoradoDarin
04-25-2010, 06:23 AM
They might have also felt that the upgrades to our DL would translate into better LBer play.

tsiguy96
04-25-2010, 07:35 AM
broncos had planned to address the situation in the draft, however the chuggers jumped in front of the broncos in the 3rd round to take LB Donald Bulter... that was Den's target... ILB is going to be a weak postion on this team unless they can sign someone who gets cut

you literally said something that 100% contradicted what josh mcdaniels said on his interview not less than 48 hours ago.

Cito Pelon
04-25-2010, 07:48 AM
Well, they have 10 LB's on the roster, seven of them listed as OLB (Haggan one of the OLB's). So yeah, the team is a little thin at ILB going into camp.

EDIT: Akin Ayodele will obviously be an ILB, so that would make 5 ILB's going into camp.

nickademus
04-25-2010, 08:11 AM
I would expect larsen to get this job. dude is athletic enough to play FB and has the size to man the possition well seems like a smart guy who will do what ever the coaches ask.

Killericon
04-25-2010, 08:13 AM
Anyone here think McDaniels has seen more of Haggan at ILB than we have?

CEH
04-25-2010, 08:15 AM
Well, they have 10 LB's on the roster, seven of them listed as OLB (Haggan one of the OLB's). So yeah, the team is a little thin at ILB going into camp.

EDIT: Akin Ayodele will obviously be an ILB, so that would make 5 ILB's going into camp.

I thought Haggan was slotted to be the starting ILBer opposite DJ.
That's what Champ said in an radio interview
Who knows

I really think Sean Weatherspoon was one of our top 3 guys but went to ATL at #19

Paladin
04-25-2010, 08:21 AM
Two years agi Larsen was killing it at LB. I think he is still good to go.....

Kaylore
04-25-2010, 08:33 AM
broncos had planned to address the situation in the draft, however the chuggers jumped in front of the broncos in the 3rd round to take LB Donald Bulter... that was Den's target... ILB is going to be a weak postion on this team unless they can sign someone who gets cut

This is pretty much the issue. We had guys we were targeting but couldn't get to them.

tsiguy96
04-25-2010, 08:39 AM
repeat, donald butler was not the pick that they wanted before chargers jumped in front. maybe someone else was at different points in the draft, but it wasnt him.

DenverBrit
04-25-2010, 08:45 AM
Martindale, being a LB coach must be confident that the draft wasn't going to help the squad enough to matter. Assuming he was asked.

Plus there's always good depth being cut but other teams over time.

Br0nc0Buster
04-25-2010, 08:47 AM
I never jumped on the "we have huge holes at linebacker" notion

I like Haggan, but I like Spencer better

DJ is solid
Doom is Doom
I think Ayers will be good

we could use some more depth, but our starters should be fine

Cito Pelon
04-25-2010, 08:51 AM
I would expect larsen to get this job. dude is athletic enough to play FB and has the size to man the possition well seems like a smart guy who will do what ever the coaches ask.

Larsen does have the ability to be steady inside, I like him. He gets banged up on ST's, though. Who's gonna take his place on ST's?

Cito Pelon
04-25-2010, 09:00 AM
Anyone here think McDaniels has seen more of Haggan at ILB than we have?

I thought Haggan was slotted to be the starting ILBer opposite DJ.

Apparently, Festus (Ha! anybody remember Festus Haggan from Gunsmoke?) will get his shot at it.

The backups have to play ST's. Do Woodyard and Haggan play ST's? I'm assuming Larsen may win an ILB slot.

Rohirrim
04-25-2010, 09:02 AM
We still need another pass rusher, but you can't get everything in one offseason. It would have been nice to pick up a guy like Jerry Hughes, but Josh was fixated on Tebow. We'll see how it pans out.

ayjackson
04-25-2010, 09:26 AM
After we signed Jarvis Green, McD spoke about Haggan fitting in nicely behind him at SILB. Haggan was a the big SILB necessary to play behind the smaller 3-4 end Green. I think we were set with our ILB's going into the draft and that's why they let Davis go. I'm sure they were open to drafting a developmental mike or jack, but I guess the value never matched the need.

Dedhed
04-25-2010, 10:40 AM
I'm sure they would have taken a LB if the board fell a different way, but it's hard to argue with the value of the guys they took on days 2 and 3.

I think they simply had higher values on Decker, Beadles, Walton, Cox, etc than they had on any of the LBs left on the board when those picks came around. You can't argue with that.

Broncoman13
04-25-2010, 10:56 AM
I think Butler was in play until the Chefs jumped us. Not real upset about it though, we would have been without either Walton or Decker had we selected Butler, and I like both of those guys a lot.

You also can count on a cut somewhere along the way that may be a good fit for us. Nobody really expected Faneca to be available and yet now he is. Same thing will happen with a LB eventually. Could be a guy like Lance Briggs or Brian Urlacher. Both are paid prett high salaries and neither are really worth their current contracts, but both can still play a role.

TheReverend
04-25-2010, 11:15 AM
Anyone here think McDaniels has seen more of Haggan at ILB than we have?

I'll bet he's seen at least as much, but we HAVE seen Haggan at MLB in 2008, as a friendly reminder.

Broncojef
04-25-2010, 11:26 AM
I also think Butler was the pick. McD eluded to the fact a couple backers were off the board when we went to make our pick and no way does Josh tip his hand that the Chargers actually took our guy. I don't think we are happy or set at LB...the rush to sign Ayodele is a telling sign. I really wish we wouldn't have dropped Davis cause we aren't as strong there as we all think...another year of missing big Al I guess.

barryr
04-25-2010, 11:38 AM
Haggan was basically an ILB until he came to the Broncos anyway, so him playing there isn't some big leap. I wanted Ayers to play opposite Dumervil so they would have 2 OLB with pass rush skills, so I'm happhy with that.

TheReverend
04-25-2010, 11:41 AM
Haggan was basically an ILB until he came to the Broncos anyway, so him playing there isn't some big leap. I wanted Ayers to play opposite Dumervil so they would have 2 OLB with pass rush skills, so I'm happhy with that.

And he was an ILB here until we moved to the 3-4. Does no one remember him and Larsen splitting time or was everyone so fascinated on Spencer they missed Haggan outplaying him?

Cito Pelon
04-25-2010, 12:06 PM
I'll bet he's seen at least as much, but we HAVE seen Haggan at MLB in 2008, as a friendly reminder.

Haggan's play inside did make him a keeper, but Larsen also had to play ST's, right?

I'm wondering if Larsen is better suited to ILB rather than ST's. Too bad Haggan isn't the beast Larsen is on ST's. Larsen's skills may be wasted on ST's, and the team gets stuck with Haggan at ILB.

This is where I agree with the anti-Tebow crowd. Giving up a 2, 3, 4 for Tebow cost Denver some ST players at worst, and some starters at best. I think Larsen could be a solid ILB, but without the 2, 3, 4 given up for Tebow, Larsen might end up wasting his career on ST's.

hambone13
04-25-2010, 12:17 PM
:giggle:Haggan's play inside did make him a keeper, but Larsen also had to play ST's, right?

I'm wondering if Larsen is better suited to ILB rather than ST's. Too bad Haggan isn't the beast Larsen is on ST's. Larsen's skills may be wasted on ST's, and the team gets stuck with Haggan at ILB.

This is where I agree with the anti-Tebow crowd. Giving up a 2, 3, 4 for Tebow cost Denver some ST players at worst, and some starters at best. I think Larsen could be a solid ILB, but without the 2, 3, 4 given up for Tebow, Larsen might end up wasting his career on ST's.

The real question is whether or not Larsen will have the spiritual wherewithal to go on with football after Tebow breaks his bubble about Joseph Smith's legitimacy as a prophet.
:giggle::giggle:

TheReverend
04-25-2010, 12:29 PM
Haggan's play inside did make him a keeper, but Larsen also had to play ST's, right?

I'm wondering if Larsen is better suited to ILB rather than ST's. Too bad Haggan isn't the beast Larsen is on ST's. Larsen's skills may be wasted on ST's, and the team gets stuck with Haggan at ILB.

This is where I agree with the anti-Tebow crowd. Giving up a 2, 3, 4 for Tebow cost Denver some ST players at worst, and some starters at best. I think Larsen could be a solid ILB, but without the 2, 3, 4 given up for Tebow, Larsen might end up wasting his career on ST's.

It cost us some starters for sure, but I'd more blame that on the Thomas pick than Tebow. Dallas would've taken Dez over Thomas if both were available, and only one other team selected a WR (Benn) before our 43 selection. There's a strong chance they would've still selected Benn and Thomas would've been available at 43. If not, Benn's still a great pick there.

Of course, there's the possibility that another team loved Thomas and would've taken him instead of the position they ended up addressing.

The point is: It takes hindsight and being picky to find faults in the draft. It was LIGHTYEARS better than last years draft weekend abortion.

Cito Pelon
04-25-2010, 01:09 PM
It cost us some starters for sure, but I'd more blame that on the Thomas pick than Tebow. Dallas would've taken Dez over Thomas if both were available, and only one other team selected a WR (Benn) before our 43 selection. There's a strong chance they would've still selected Benn and Thomas would've been available at 43. If not, Benn's still a great pick there.

Of course, there's the possibility that another team loved Thomas and would've taken him instead of the position they ended up addressing.

The point is: It takes hindsight and being picky to find faults in the draft. It was LIGHTYEARS better than last years draft weekend abortion.

So, you're saying they should have taken Tebow at 22, then stood pat? Good point.

TheReverend
04-25-2010, 01:14 PM
So, you're saying they should have taken Tebow at 22, then stood pat? Good point.

At 24. We used a 4th rounder I believe to move to 22 from 24.

Bronco Yoda
04-25-2010, 01:20 PM
I'm sure they would have taken a LB if the board fell a different way, but it's hard to argue with the value of the guys they took on days 2 and 3.

I think they simply had higher values on Decker, Beadles, Walton, Cox, etc than they had on any of the LBs left on the board when those picks came around. You can't argue with that.

this

Cito Pelon
04-25-2010, 01:25 PM
At 24. We used a 4th rounder I believe to move to 22 from 24.

Yeah, that would have worked out better than what occurred. Ah well, just gotta wait it out and see. As you said, it wasn't a bad draft.