PDA

View Full Version : beadles moved to LG


tsiguy96
06-08-2010, 09:37 AM
per rotoworld per DP:

The Broncos have moved second-round pick Zane Beadles to left guard.
Beadles, the 45th overall pick in April, was initially practicing at right tackle with Ryan Harris (toe) sidelined. Left guard, however, gives him his best shot to win a starting job. Beadles' competition will be journeyman Russ Hochstein, who is 33 years old and coming off reconstructive knee surgery.

http://www.denverpost.com/premium/broncos/ci_15248058

tsiguy96
06-08-2010, 09:38 AM
just as we expected, LG would be the biggest position battle this summer, along with nickel DB. it seems JD walton took the starting center position pretty quickly into OTAs.

watermock
06-08-2010, 09:39 AM
Duh

bronco militia
06-08-2010, 09:43 AM
just as we expected, LG would be the biggest position battle this summer, .

who else is competing at LG? your link only mentions Hochstein

Man-Goblin
06-08-2010, 09:45 AM
Ladies and gentlemen, the Beadles! Lets bring them on.

http://www.football.com/UserFiles/Image/NCAA/Zane%20Beadles/126200901020478_sugar_bowl_utah_v_alabama.jpg

SonOfLe-loLang
06-08-2010, 09:46 AM
who else is competing at LG? your link only mentions Hochstein

Olsen

Popps
06-08-2010, 09:46 AM
What about the RT spot? How healthy is Harris right now, and who's backing him up? Can't recall...

tsiguy96
06-08-2010, 09:46 AM
who else is competing at LG? your link only mentions Hochstein

yea its basically down to olsen and beadles i think.

OBF1
06-08-2010, 10:01 AM
What about the RT spot? How healthy is Harris right now, and who's backing him up? Can't recall...

Chris Marinelli

OBF1
06-08-2010, 10:03 AM
Per Montrose.... who is a very good source:

LT: Ryan Clady, Tyler Polumbus, D'Anthony Batiste, Paul Duncan
LG: ZANE BEADLES, Seth Olsen, Russ Hochstein
C: JD Walton, Dustin Fry
RG: Chris Kuper, Eric Olsen, Stanley Daniels
RT: Ryan Harris, Chris Marinelli

NFLBRONCO
06-08-2010, 10:03 AM
This thread bugs me

bronco militia
06-08-2010, 10:04 AM
This thread bugs me

this is a bug you probably shouldn't step on

bowtown
06-08-2010, 10:05 AM
That's inzane!

gyldenlove
06-08-2010, 10:07 AM
What about the RT spot? How healthy is Harris right now, and who's backing him up? Can't recall...

Healthy enough to be in team drills, if he is not 100% by now it is very close. I imagine that Polumbus will back him up when Clady is on hand.

Kaylore
06-08-2010, 10:08 AM
Good. That's where he can have the most success. He lacks the dexterity to be a starter at either tackle position, but his mass inside will be a boon for this, until recently, tiny offensive line.

Los Broncos
06-08-2010, 10:13 AM
Anyone have any video links to his college highlights?

Doggcow
06-08-2010, 10:16 AM
That's inzane!

I LOL'd

TheReverend
06-08-2010, 10:20 AM
What about the RT spot? How healthy is Harris right now, and who's backing him up? Can't recall...

Polumbus will be a swing tackle.

GoBroncos84
06-08-2010, 10:26 AM
I agree with Montrose that beadles and walton will start. Could be some growing pains having two rookies,but eventually it'll pay off. Beadles at LG is definitely where he has most upside.

Rabb
06-08-2010, 10:28 AM
I am excited to see our lines develop

Taco John
06-08-2010, 10:32 AM
Every scouting report I've read about this guy has said he'll never make it at the pro level as a tackle, but as a guard he could really contribute.

crush17
06-08-2010, 10:34 AM
This is where he was gonna be from the get go. Good to hear things are somewhat falling into place.

Excellent to know that JD Walton is what we hoped he would be.

Go Broncs!

meangene
06-08-2010, 10:34 AM
To me, this leads to two conclusions: First, Beadles must be impressing enough that they want to move him to the position where he has the best chance to earn a starting spot right away. Harris has barely returned to practice and Beadles would provide some insurance at the right tackle spot. But, moving him now to compete with Olsen tells me they really like what they see of him. Second, the team must have some confidence in Marinelli, which is the biggest surprise to me. Polumbus may ultimately be depth at both tackle spots but, given the health concerns of Clady and Harris, and Polumbus' generally poor performance at RT last year, that seems a bit risky. Unless, again, they feel good about Marinelli. Interesting...

SoDak Bronco
06-08-2010, 10:37 AM
Seth Olsen from Iowa will be starting...Give beadles time, he will be a good backup at the tackles and guard spots.

Taco John
06-08-2010, 10:38 AM
To me, this leads to two conclusions: First, Beadles must be impressing enough that they want to move him to the position where he has the best chance to earn a starting spot right away. Harris has barely returned to practice and Beadles would provide some insurance at the right tackle spot. But, moving him now to compete with Olsen tells me they really like what they see of him. Second, the team must have some confidence in Marinelli, which is the biggest surprise to me. Polumbus may ultimately be depth at both tackle spots but, given the health concerns of Clady and Harris, and Polumbus' generally poor performance at RT last year, that seems a bit risky. Unless, again, they feel good about Marinelli. Interesting...


I'm all for optimism, but wow... Moving him away from tackle probably speaks more to the fact that they're not liking what they're seeing of him at the position, and wanted to move him back to a position where he can make the team. Or, I guess you could be right and it means he's so awesome as a tackle that they can't wait to move him somewhere else to be even more awesome.

tsiguy96
06-08-2010, 10:40 AM
still wish we took vladimir ducasse! guess hes basically locked down a starting G spot in NY

meangene
06-08-2010, 10:52 AM
I'm all for optimism, but wow... Moving him away from tackle probably speaks more to the fact that they're not liking what they're seeing of him at the position, and wanted to move him back to a position where he can make the team. Or, I guess you could be right and it means he's so awesome as a tackle that they can't wait to move him somewhere else to be even more awesome.

Somewhere more in between I think. We are too thin at tackle to be moving him inside to LG unless we see him as a potential starter there. I doubt he sucks that bad in the limited OTA's that we are moving him this soon just so he can have a chance to make the team. Plus, we have both Olsens capable of playing LG and Hochstein returning at some point. View at as a negative if you want - I'll choose to be optimistic.

Br0nc0Buster
06-08-2010, 11:01 AM
I'm all for optimism, but wow... Moving him away from tackle probably speaks more to the fact that they're not liking what they're seeing of him at the position, and wanted to move him back to a position where he can make the team. Or, I guess you could be right and it means he's so awesome as a tackle that they can't wait to move him somewhere else to be even more awesome.

I dont see that as overly optimistic
Josh said the best 5 will start, it is possible they like him enough to move him to a spot where he is likely to start than stick him as a backup

I dont think Beadles was drafted to be a backup tackle, Im sure the plan was to start him at guard all along with his versatility to play tackle being a plus other guard/tackles in the draft may of lacked

underrated29
06-08-2010, 11:02 AM
I doubt it. Beadles will imo not be starting ahead of S olsen at LG...

Right now Seth Olsen is playing RG because Kuper is a vet and not there. Once kupes is back Seth IMO will move back to LG... Beadles is good and he can play everyone on the line. Olsen can play everywhere except T...

Olsen will be the one starting not beadles.....But if beadles does beat him out then he must be very very good, because seth is a very good OG!

outdoor_miner
06-08-2010, 11:04 AM
I'm all for optimism, but wow... Moving him away from tackle probably speaks more to the fact that they're not liking what they're seeing of him at the position, and wanted to move him back to a position where he can make the team. Or, I guess you could be right and it means he's so awesome as a tackle that they can't wait to move him somewhere else to be even more awesome.

There is no way they drafted him in the 2nd round to be a backup to Clady and Harris. He was always intended to start at Guard. They probably also like the fact that he could potentially swing out to RT if needed (and maybe that's his long-term projection if Harris continues to be injury plagued).

jutang
06-08-2010, 11:06 AM
Could also be a great sign that Harris has fully recovered from his toe and back injuries.

tsiguy96
06-08-2010, 11:14 AM
per frank schaub...



He has a good shot, but think Hochstein starts somewhere RT @tsiguy96 so is JD walton pretty much going to be the starting C this year

Steve Sewell
06-08-2010, 11:23 AM
Ladies and gentlemen, the Beadles! Lets bring them on.

http://www.football.com/UserFiles/Image/NCAA/Zane%20Beadles/126200901020478_sugar_bowl_utah_v_alabama.jpg

You don't mess wit da Beadles!

oubronco
06-08-2010, 11:26 AM
I think it's great we have guys who are so good they have to move them around to get them on the field

Competition is great

Drek
06-08-2010, 11:39 AM
per frank schaub...



He has a good shot, but think Hochstein starts somewhere RT @tsiguy96 so is JD walton pretty much going to be the starting C this year

I'm personally expecting Hochstein to get let go in final cut downs.

33, reconstructed knee, no position of particular excellence on his resume. I see Eric Olsen as a guy drafted with nearly identical versatility and better size with the express intent of replacing Hochstein.

Dagmar
06-08-2010, 11:42 AM
per frank schaub...



He has a good shot, but think Hochstein starts somewhere RT @tsiguy96 so is JD walton pretty much going to be the starting C this year

You manage to get people to reply to you a lot don't you? I have seen your name pop up and I only follow a few folks!

tsiguy96
06-08-2010, 11:44 AM
You manage to get people to reply to you a lot don't you? I have seen your name pop up and I only follow a few folks!

i dont reply to a lot of people, frank replies to everyone, andrew mason does pretty much as well.

Tombstone RJ
06-08-2010, 11:52 AM
What about the RT spot? How healthy is Harris right now, and who's backing him up? Can't recall...

The good thing about Beadles is his smarts. If Harris goes down they probably move Beadles to RT and insert a backup at LG. This is why Beadles is so cool, he gives McD lots of flexibility.

Kaylore
06-08-2010, 11:55 AM
I'm personally expecting Hochstein to get let go in final cut downs.

33, reconstructed knee, no position of particular excellence on his resume. I see Eric Olsen as a guy drafted with nearly identical versatility and better size with the express intent of replacing Hochstein.

That's a great point and perhaps wouldn't be a total shock. Between Olsen and Beadles, hopefully we have enough youth and competition to develop a much more fortified line. I like that we have more 300lbers than 280lbers. I hate to say it, but Hamilton and Wiegman were really getting handled last season. With two rookies inside, what we lose in mental errors we'll probably make up in athleticism, so at the worst it will be a lateral move, at least early on.

I don't think this move is anything more than Harris coming back and the staff moving Beadles back to the position they feel he can do best, and likely was drafted to play at.

underrated29
06-08-2010, 11:55 AM
I'm personally expecting Hochstein to get let go in final cut downs.

33, reconstructed knee, no position of particular excellence on his resume. I see Eric Olsen as a guy drafted with nearly identical versatility and better size with the express intent of replacing Hochstein.




you could be on to something here.

Tombstone RJ
06-08-2010, 12:00 PM
That's a great point and perhaps wouldn't be a total shock. Between Olsen and Beadles, hopefully we have enough youth and competition to develop a much more fortified line. I like that we have more 300lbers than 280lbers. I hate to say it, but Hamilton and Wiegman were really getting handled last season. With two rookies inside, what we lose in mental errors we'll probably make up in athleticism, so at the worst it will be a lateral move, at least early on.

I don't think this move is anything more than Harris coming back and the staff moving Beadles back to the position they feel he can do best, and likely was drafted to play at.

I think moving Beadles to LG is simply a pragmatic move to get him on the field. He's big and smart and immediately increases the interior lines ability to run inside and protect Orton. If Harris goes down then I see Beadles moving back to RT and Olsen moves to LG. This actually makes a lot of sense. This way Beadles plays immediately.

Mogulseeker
06-08-2010, 12:02 PM
just as we expected, LG would be the biggest position battle this summer, along with nickel DB. it seems JD walton took the starting center position pretty quickly into OTAs.

I thought Walton was struggling.

bronco militia
06-08-2010, 12:04 PM
I'm all for optimism, but wow... Moving him away from tackle probably speaks more to the fact that they're not liking what they're seeing of him at the position, and wanted to move him back to a position where he can make the team. Or, I guess you could be right and it means he's so awesome as a tackle that they can't wait to move him somewhere else to be even more awesome.

they drafted him to be a guard

TheReverend
06-08-2010, 12:09 PM
I'm personally expecting Hochstein to get let go in final cut downs.

33, reconstructed knee, no position of particular excellence on his resume. I see Eric Olsen as a guy drafted with nearly identical versatility and better size with the express intent of replacing Hochstein.

I'm certain that Olsen was drafted with the express intent of competing and at worst being a long term interior swing player, but without REALLY turning it on, I definitely see him heading for the practice squad and easily clearing waivers THIS year.

Kaylore
06-08-2010, 12:23 PM
I think moving Beadles to LG is simply a pragmatic move to get him on the field. He's big and smart and immediately increases the interior lines ability to run inside and protect Orton. If Harris goes down then I see Beadles moving back to RT and Olsen moves to LG. This actually makes a lot of sense. This way Beadles plays immediately.

I think Beadles was never really intended to play RT. I think his versatility and ability to kick out there if need be was factored into him being taken ahead of Walton, but I think they wanted him to play guard all along.

Mogulseeker
06-08-2010, 12:23 PM
To me, this leads to two conclusions: First, Beadles must be impressing enough that they want to move him to the position where he has the best chance to earn a starting spot right away. Harris has barely returned to practice and Beadles would provide some insurance at the right tackle spot. But, moving him now to compete with Olsen tells me they really like what they see of him. Second, the team must have some confidence in Marinelli, which is the biggest surprise to me. Polumbus may ultimately be depth at both tackle spots but, given the health concerns of Clady and Harris, and Polumbus' generally poor performance at RT last year, that seems a bit risky. Unless, again, they feel good about Marinelli. Interesting...

I like Polumbus a lot, but his performance at RT last year was abysmal.

Kaylore
06-08-2010, 12:25 PM
I'm certain that Olsen was drafted with the express intent of competing and at worst being a long term interior swing player, but without REALLY turning it on, I definitely see him heading for the practice squad and easily clearing waivers THIS year.

I thought he meant Seth. All these Olsen's are confusing me. Yeah Eric isn't as tiny as Eslinger, so he has a better shot, but he's probably as much a project.

TheReverend
06-08-2010, 12:42 PM
I thought he meant Seth. All these Olsen's are confusing me. Yeah Eric isn't as tiny as Eslinger, so he has a better shot, but he's probably as much a project.

As for Seth, I'm not ruling him out of a great shot in the race for a starting slot at LG/C anytime soon.

TheReverend
06-08-2010, 12:44 PM
One other seth olsen note... he has the pre-req "ugly" down to be a lineman, but he's not the scary type of ugly to be an impact OL.

http://a.espncdn.com/i/headshots/nfl/players/65/12712.jpg

Kaylore
06-08-2010, 12:49 PM
One other seth olsen note... he has the pre-req "ugly" down to be a lineman, but he's not the scary type of ugly to be an impact OL.

http://a.espncdn.com/i/headshots/nfl/players/65/12712.jpg

He so looks like that kid in the back of the elementary school class who would eat his scabs.

TheReverend
06-08-2010, 12:58 PM
He so looks like that kid in the back of the elementary school class who would eat his scabs.

Too much paste probably hyper accelerated his pituitary gland.

Regardless, we should be thinning our OL candidates based on my scary-ugly scouting meters.

Don't believe it's accuracy?

Take a look at Anthony Munoz, Larry Allen, John Ogden, Nalen, Zimm, etc.

These are guys that even if they're smiling at you, you're pretty sure they're going to kill you.

gyldenlove
06-08-2010, 01:02 PM
Broncos offensive linemen:

LT:
http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/getty/headshot/C/L/A/CLA031385.jpg

LG:
http://40-yard-dash-times.com/images/Seth%20Olsen%20(OG).jpg
or
http://www.seniorclassaward.com/images/sized/images/athletes/372904362_tn-150x188.jpg

C:
http://media.scout.com/Media/Image/69/695247.jpg

RG:
http://o.aolcdn.com/art/sportsdata/nfl/players/hs_7910.jpg

RT:
http://www.blueandgold.com/images/photos/image/players/headshots/harris_ryan_3593.jpg

Backups:

http://www.prodraftparty.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/ericolsen.jpg

http://www.bucpower.com/russ-hochstein.jpg

http://o.aolcdn.com/art/sportsdata/nfl/players/hs_9071.jpg

Aside from Clady and Walton there isn't a decent barbeque scowel to be had.

Dagmar
06-08-2010, 01:02 PM
Too much paste probably hyper accelerated his pituitary gland.

Regardless, we should be thinning our OL candidates based on my scary-ugly scouting meters.

Don't believe it's accuracy?

Take a look at Anthony Munoz, Larry Allen, John Ogden, Nalen, Zimm, etc.

These are guys that even if they're smiling at you, you're pretty sure they're going to kill you.

That post is skirting mock haiku...

bronco militia
06-08-2010, 01:04 PM
http://jacksonville.com/sites/default/files/editorial/images/files/editorial/images/lynn/jacksonville/mdControlled/cms/2009/01/21/21946268.jpg

TheReverend
06-08-2010, 01:07 PM
Broncos offensive linemen:

LT:
http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/getty/headshot/C/L/A/CLA031385.jpg

LG:
http://40-yard-dash-times.com/images/Seth%20Olsen%20(OG).jpg
or
http://www.seniorclassaward.com/images/sized/images/athletes/372904362_tn-150x188.jpg

C:
http://media.scout.com/Media/Image/69/695247.jpg

RG:
http://o.aolcdn.com/art/sportsdata/nfl/players/hs_7910.jpg

RT:
http://www.blueandgold.com/images/photos/image/players/headshots/harris_ryan_3593.jpg

Backups:

http://www.prodraftparty.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/ericolsen.jpg

http://www.bucpower.com/russ-hochstein.jpg

http://o.aolcdn.com/art/sportsdata/nfl/players/hs_9071.jpg

Aside from Clady and Walton there isn't a decent barbeque scowel to be had.

:notworthy

Walton just broke the scale.

He'll start at C for the next 15 years and be HoF bound. Mark my words!

Beantown Bronco
06-08-2010, 01:08 PM
Or, I guess you could be right and it means he's so awesome as a tackle that they can't wait to move him somewhere else to be even more awesome.

<object style="height: 344px; width: 425px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Xcf4JBWBoEE"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Xcf4JBWBoEE" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></object>

Kaylore
06-08-2010, 02:38 PM
Broncos offensive linemen:

LT:
http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/getty/headshot/C/L/A/CLA031385.jpg

LG:
http://40-yard-dash-times.com/images/Seth%20Olsen%20(OG).jpg
or
http://www.seniorclassaward.com/images/sized/images/athletes/372904362_tn-150x188.jpg

C:
http://media.scout.com/Media/Image/69/695247.jpg

RG:
http://o.aolcdn.com/art/sportsdata/nfl/players/hs_7910.jpg

RT:
http://www.blueandgold.com/images/photos/image/players/headshots/harris_ryan_3593.jpg

Backups:

http://www.prodraftparty.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/ericolsen.jpg

http://www.bucpower.com/russ-hochstein.jpg

http://o.aolcdn.com/art/sportsdata/nfl/players/hs_9071.jpg

Aside from Clady and Walton there isn't a decent barbeque scowel to be had.
According to this, Seth Olsen will be our starting LG while Beadles struggles, Pollumbus will be cut and JD Walton is going to be an all pro this year. :haw!:

footstepsfrom#27
06-08-2010, 02:55 PM
http://o.aolcdn.com/art/sportsdata/nfl/players/hs_7910.jpg
Apologies to Kupesdad but Chris Kuper reminds me of an adult version of Pugsley from the Adams family...no?

bronclvr
06-08-2010, 02:59 PM
The Utes are one of my favorite College Teams, so I am glad we have a Utah player with the Broncos (sorry Kaylore, I just can't wrap my head around being a BYU fan)-anyway, he did a great job for us, and can be a beast. I look for good things from him, whether it's at Guard or Tackle-

Kaylore
06-08-2010, 03:35 PM
The Utes are one of my favorite College Teams, so I am glad we have a Utah player with the Broncos (sorry Kaylore, I just can't wrap my head around being a BYU fan)-anyway, he did a great job for us, and can be a beast. I look for good things from him, whether it's at Guard or Tackle-

I have no problems with Ute players (I really liked Eric Weddle) but I was never in love with Beadles as a pro tackle. I do like him at guard though.

And being a BYU fan is awesome.

Los Broncos
06-08-2010, 03:42 PM
Olsen looks like a fat Jay Cutler.

Chris
06-08-2010, 04:01 PM
Jay Cutler looks like a fat Jay Cutler.

Dagmar
06-08-2010, 04:02 PM
Jay Cutler looks like a fat Jay Cutler.

Ha! I wanted to post that Ha!

Dedhed
06-08-2010, 05:55 PM
I think this move speaks to the health of Ryan Harris more than anything, which is a good sign. I think they're going to look for starters first, and worry about backup roles when a player goes down.

If Harris is healthy, he's going to start at RT. Beadles wasn't drafted to be a backup, and with Harris healthy he's going to compete inside.

I like that Walton seems to have stepped right in and taken control of the C spot. Hopefully he's as good when the pads go on.

TheReverend
06-08-2010, 06:31 PM
I think this move speaks to the health of Ryan Harris more than anything, which is a good sign. I think they're going to look for starters first, and worry about backup roles when a player goes down.

If Harris is healthy, he's going to start at RT. Beadles wasn't drafted to be a backup, and with Harris healthy he's going to compete inside.

I like that Walton seems to have stepped right in and taken control of the C spot. Hopefully he's as good when the pads go on.

Good post. I'd just tweak some phrasing to fully agree.

"I think they're going to look to primary positions for players first, and worry about versatility when the primary position is learned" is how I'd phrase it.

gyldenlove
06-08-2010, 07:38 PM
Jay Cutler looks like a fat Jay Cutler.

Dude you just created an infinite Jay Cutler recursion, shame on you.

RunSilentRunDeep
06-08-2010, 07:59 PM
You don't mess wit da Beadles!

Screw da Kool Aid. Give me some Beadles Juice!!

Chris
06-08-2010, 08:18 PM
Jay Cutler looks like a fat Jay Cutler looks like a Jay Cutler looks like a TIME TRAVEL

Play2win
06-08-2010, 08:20 PM
Screw da Kool Aid. Give me some Beadles Juice!!

NICE-- Thats a good one. One of the few on here I actually wish I thought of first. :thumbsup:

underrated29
06-08-2010, 08:31 PM
Why does everyone keep saying beadles was not drafted to be a backup???

This makes ZERO sense..

we have clady, harris and who..???? Polumbus, huchstein?? Do you remember how freaking bad we were when harris went down with injury. Our depth at T blows balls!!

We had to draft him. We needed someone who could do a respectable job if harris or someone else went down.



The good think is beadles is the ultimate backup. He can fill in anywhere on the line. I do not believe he starts for us anywhere, but will be the first person called to fill in should we have someone go down briefly.

Br0nc0Buster
06-08-2010, 10:19 PM
Why does everyone keep saying beadles was not drafted to be a backup???

This makes ZERO sense..

we have clady, harris and who..???? Polumbus, huchstein?? Do you remember how freaking bad we were when harris went down with injury. Our depth at T blows balls!!

We had to draft him. We needed someone who could do a respectable job if harris or someone else went down.



The good think is beadles is the ultimate backup. He can fill in anywhere on the line. I do not believe he starts for us anywhere, but will be the first person called to fill in should we have someone go down briefly.

because teams dont spend second round picks to draft backups especially in a very deep draft
plus he wasnt a top tackle prospect for the NFL, he was a guy who was projected by everyone to move to guard or even center once he went pro

Taco John
06-08-2010, 10:32 PM
Somewhere more in between I think. We are too thin at tackle to be moving him inside to LG unless we see him as a potential starter there. I doubt he sucks that bad in the limited OTA's that we are moving him this soon just so he can have a chance to make the team. Plus, we have both Olsens capable of playing LG and Hochstein returning at some point. View at as a negative if you want - I'll choose to be optimistic.


I don't view it as a negative. I view it as a confirmation of what all the scouting reports said: the guy isn't cut out to be a tackle at this level. I'm not about to guess how this projects for his chances to be a starter for this team except to say that he's got a good a chance as any given the state of our left guard spot.

By all accounts, Beadles has the intelligence to play in this offense. But what remains to be seen is whether or not he has the physical tools. The scouting reports doubted that he did citing poor footwork and general lack of athleticism. As far as I can tell, this news merely confirms what the scouting reports said, particularly about him being overmatched to play as a tackle at this level. I'm not about to doubt his ability to play guard at this level until we see him in actual game action. It's my hope that smarts and technique turn this guy into a solid starter.

footstepsfrom#27
06-08-2010, 10:54 PM
because teams dont spend second round picks to draft backups especially in a very deep draft
plus he wasnt a top tackle prospect for the NFL, he was a guy who was projected by everyone to move to guard or even center once he went pro
Richard Quinn ring any bells?

FireFly
06-09-2010, 02:02 AM
I'm all for optimism, but wow... Moving him away from tackle probably speaks more to the fact that they're not liking what they're seeing of him at the position, and wanted to move him back to a position where he can make the team. Or, I guess you could be right and it means he's so awesome as a tackle that they can't wait to move him somewhere else to be even more awesome.

I hate you for talking sense.

My favorite part of the off season is being swept away with the false optimism.

FireFly
06-09-2010, 02:05 AM
Richard Quinn ring any bells?

Richard Quinn will count himself lucky to hold down a back-up spot

tsiguy96
06-09-2010, 02:20 AM
Richard Quinn will count himself lucky to hold down a back-up spot

as much as i understood and appreciated that pick at the time, it too has turned out to be a waste based on reports this OTAs. but like smith, hope he can turn it around...

meangene
06-09-2010, 03:00 AM
I don't view it as a negative. I view it as a confirmation of what all the scouting reports said: the guy isn't cut out to be a tackle at this level. I'm not about to guess how this projects for his chances to be a starter for this team except to say that he's got a good a chance as any given the state of our left guard spot.

By all accounts, Beadles has the intelligence to play in this offense. But what remains to be seen is whether or not he has the physical tools. The scouting reports doubted that he did citing poor footwork and general lack of athleticism. As far as I can tell, this news merely confirms what the scouting reports said, particularly about him being overmatched to play as a tackle at this level. I'm not about to doubt his ability to play guard at this level until we see him in actual game action. It's my hope that smarts and technique turn this guy into a solid starter.

I'll agree with you that his best position in the NFL is as a guard. However, I disagree that his move to LG is an indictment of his ability to play as a backup at RT. Rather, I see it is an attempt to get our best talent on the field and, with Harris returning, Beadles has the best opportunity to do that at LG. Nothing I have seen, heard or read indicates any unhappiness with his performance in the OTA's.

tsiguy96
06-09-2010, 03:06 AM
I'll agree with you that his best position in the NFL is as a guard. However, I disagree that his move to LG is an indictment of his ability to play as a backup at RT. Rather, I see it is an attempt to get our best talent on the field and, with Harris returning, Beadles has the best opportunity to do that at LG. Nothing I have seen, heard or read indicates any unhappiness with his performance in the OTA's.

exactly. they are trying to get the best 5 guys on the line at the same time, not trying to position him to be a versatile backup, that will happen with whoever doesnt win a spot in camp.

Br0nc0Buster
06-09-2010, 06:18 AM
Richard Quinn ring any bells?

Richard Quinn wasnt drafted for the sole purpose of relieving an injured player
There are plenty of formations that use two tight ends
not near as many that use 6+ linemen

Drek
06-09-2010, 06:21 AM
I hate you for talking sense.

My favorite part of the off season is being swept away with the false optimism.

It isn't speaking sense, its a lack of paying attention.

Everyone knows that Beadles profiles best as an OG. He's got average at best athleticism for an OT, but great athleticism for his size on the interior. Same goes with arm length. Every scout/draftnik has said that about him even going back before the draft.

The fact that they didn't immediately put him at OG means either A. they see something worth developing as an OT or B. it was just such a need in practice that they had to throw someone in at RT, Beadles' development as an OG be damned.

We had Maurice Williams and Marinelli on the roster though, so option B doesn't make a whole lot of sense if you think Beadles is a long term OG and nothing else.

They see him as a guy who could contribute day one at OG, but with OT potential in a need/long term situation. That is the obvious conclusion to draw from how they've used him to date in OTAs (which is still just OTAs, so its not worth a ton).

underrated29
06-09-2010, 10:34 AM
because teams dont spend second round picks to draft backups especially in a very deep draft
plus he wasnt a top tackle prospect for the NFL, he was a guy who was projected by everyone to move to guard or even center once he went pro



See I disagree.

We needed a good backup T. a 2nd rdr is perfect. A late round guy like polumbus, eric olsen etc...just suck testes. Sure his arms are not real long but he is still a very good T. Not supreme but solid. I am not sure if he was projected to play G, or C as much as he is a bad T. But because he can play all spots on the line and is so versatile that teams would have needs there first.IE- C, G, etc..

IMO we dont. We have a line like this:

clady, seth, JD, Kupes, Harris

1st backup: Beadles- to anywhere above
then we have guys that can play their respective positions, russ, eric, tyler d'antoine or whatever his name is.


We will see I suppose, but I think Seth Olsen is a better G (although RG, but kuper is not leaving that spot) than beadles. And I do not like the idea of our ONLY half way decent backup T playing on the line too. Because if he gets hurt then our T depth is back to nil and we all saw what it looked like when harris went down.

Taco John
06-09-2010, 10:37 AM
It isn't speaking sense, its a lack of paying attention.

Everyone knows that Beadles profiles best as an OG. He's got average at best athleticism for an OT, but great athleticism for his size on the interior. Same goes with arm length. Every scout/draftnik has said that about him even going back before the draft.

The fact that they didn't immediately put him at OG means either A. they see something worth developing as an OT or B. it was just such a need in practice that they had to throw someone in at RT, Beadles' development as an OG be damned.

We had Maurice Williams and Marinelli on the roster though, so option B doesn't make a whole lot of sense if you think Beadles is a long term OG and nothing else.

They see him as a guy who could contribute day one at OG, but with OT potential in a need/long term situation. That is the obvious conclusion to draw from how they've used him to date in OTAs (which is still just OTAs, so its not worth a ton).

You forgot option C: They thought they knew something that everybody else didn't, and are finding out that they were wrong. Which is the option that occam's razor suggests.

All this fanciful imagination about what an awesome indicator it is that he's being moved is just that: fanciful imagination.

Our quest to find the right 5 are just beginning and what we know now is that Beadles isn't going to be playing much tackle for us (and if he does, we're probably in trouble). That's the only thing this move really shows.

tsiguy96
06-09-2010, 10:37 AM
See I disagree.

We needed a good backup T. a 2nd rdr is perfect. A late round guy like polumbus, eric olsen etc...just suck testes. Sure his arms are not real long but he is still a very good T. Not supreme but solid. I am not sure if he was projected to play G, or C as much as he is a bad T. But because he can play all spots on the line and is so versatile that teams would have needs there first.IE- C, G, etc..

IMO we dont. We have a line like this:

clady, seth, JD, Kupes, Harris

1st backup: Beadles- to anywhere above
then we have guys that can play their respective positions, russ, eric, tyler d'antoine or whatever his name is.


We will see I suppose, but I think Seth Olsen is a better G (although RG, but kuper is not leaving that spot) than beadles. And I do not like the idea of our ONLY half way decent backup T playing on the line too. Because if he gets hurt then our T depth is back to nil and we all saw what it looked like when harris went down.

you dont draft a 2nd round pick to be a backup, its not how it works in teh NFL. if it shakes out that way that he is the 6th best lineman on the team, so be it, but 2nd round picks are not insurance picks, they are expected to contribute. LG was one of the true weaknesses on the team and its a real competition at that spot with him and seth.

underrated29
06-09-2010, 10:43 AM
you dont draft a 2nd round pick to be a backup, its not how it works in teh NFL. if it shakes out that way that he is the 6th best lineman on the team, so be it, but 2nd round picks are not insurance picks, they are expected to contribute. LG was one of the true weaknesses on the team and its a real competition at that spot with him and seth.


I believe that it is a good competition between him and seth. No doubt there. But he is an ace in the whole. He can play anywhere. That value alone is phenominal. And who knows if we are going to be resigning harris. If he has another Injured year we might make him a low ball offer, but he could walk. Then we have no T at all.

I am not saying we took him just to sit, we took him for depth, for starting at RT possibly in the future, and for his ability to come in, plug and play and be solid for us anywhere we need him on the line. And I believe that Seth will edge him out for the LG spot.

tsiguy96
06-09-2010, 10:44 AM
I believe that it is a good competition between him and seth. No doubt there. But he is an ace in the whole. He can play anywhere. That value alone is phenominal. And who knows if we are going to be resigning harris. If he has another Injured year we might make him a low ball offer, but he could walk. Then we have no T at all.

I am not saying we took him just to sit, we took him for depth, for starting at RT possibly in the future, and for his ability to come in, plug and play and be solid for us anywhere we need him on the line. And I believe that Seth will edge him out for the LG spot.

yes, hes competition and competing for a starting job right now, thats why he was drafted. if he doesnt win and can back up others on hte line, then thats a good thing.

Br0nc0Buster
06-09-2010, 11:01 AM
See I disagree.

We needed a good backup T. a 2nd rdr is perfect. A late round guy like polumbus, eric olsen etc...just suck testes. Sure his arms are not real long but he is still a very good T. Not supreme but solid. I am not sure if he was projected to play G, or C as much as he is a bad T. But because he can play all spots on the line and is so versatile that teams would have needs there first.IE- C, G, etc..

IMO we dont. We have a line like this:

clady, seth, JD, Kupes, Harris

1st backup: Beadles- to anywhere above
then we have guys that can play their respective positions, russ, eric, tyler d'antoine or whatever his name is.


We will see I suppose, but I think Seth Olsen is a better G (although RG, but kuper is not leaving that spot) than beadles. And I do not like the idea of our ONLY half way decent backup T playing on the line too. Because if he gets hurt then our T depth is back to nil and we all saw what it looked like when harris went down.

if backup tackle is what they were looking for then there were better options than Beadles
It makes sense that they viewed his versatility as a plus, but that they also viewed him as a guy who can compete for a starting guard job while also be versatile enough to kick out to tackle if need be for a short period of time

besides how many teams are really confident in their 3rd options at tackle?
You say if Harris gets hurt AND Beadles gets hurt because he is starting we are in trouble, well I am not sure that concern is legitimate enough to warrant a second round selection

we have bigger holes to fill than those involving scenarios that may or may not even happen

I guess we will just have to see how it plays out, I think the FO views him as a guard who is versatile to play tackle in a pinch, but that wont be known at least until the pads come on I would think

gyldenlove
06-09-2010, 11:06 AM
It isn't speaking sense, its a lack of paying attention.

Everyone knows that Beadles profiles best as an OG. He's got average at best athleticism for an OT, but great athleticism for his size on the interior. Same goes with arm length. Every scout/draftnik has said that about him even going back before the draft.

The fact that they didn't immediately put him at OG means either A. they see something worth developing as an OT or B. it was just such a need in practice that they had to throw someone in at RT, Beadles' development as an OG be damned.

We had Maurice Williams and Marinelli on the roster though, so option B doesn't make a whole lot of sense if you think Beadles is a long term OG and nothing else.

They see him as a guy who could contribute day one at OG, but with OT potential in a need/long term situation. That is the obvious conclusion to draw from how they've used him to date in OTAs (which is still just OTAs, so its not worth a ton).

The only problem with projecting him as guard is his upper body strength which is not where it should be. He is going to take some time to adapt to the inside where he will have to rely on power more than he did at tackle. At tackle your hustle can help you make up for lack of athleticism but at guard it will be phonebox battles where power matters much more and that is harder to make up for with hustle, the only alternative is playing with leverage and knowing your blocking angles to perfection.

gyldenlove
06-09-2010, 11:12 AM
You forgot option C: They thought they knew something that everybody else didn't, and are finding out that they were wrong. Which is the option that occam's razor suggests.

All this fanciful imagination about what an awesome indicator it is that he's being moved is just that: fanciful imagination.

Our quest to find the right 5 are just beginning and what we know now is that Beadles isn't going to be playing much tackle for us (and if he does, we're probably in trouble). That's the only thing this move really shows.

Considering that Clady and Harris are both young and both very high quality starters it was not likely that Beadles was drafted to compete directly with either. Of the possible reasons we drafted I would consider the fact that he can function as a backup tackle if needed along with his good projection to guard (as demonstrated during the senior bowl where he struggled at OT but looked pretty good at OG) which combined with our lack of depth and quality at the LG position and backup OG position made him valuable.

When looking at the value a player brings not only do you have to look at starting potential you also have to look at improving the roster as a whole. A player like Beadles fits that bill in that he can challenge to start at LG and can provide depth at OT.

Drek
06-09-2010, 11:43 AM
You forgot option C: They thought they knew something that everybody else didn't, and are finding out that they were wrong. Which is the option that occam's razor suggests.
Why not back that up with some logic then champ?

Everyone has seen the guy as a guard with potential OT versatility from day one. McDaniels even referred to him as a OT/OG when they drafted him despite Beadles not playing OG since he was a freshman.

We have two good OTs when healthy, yet we used the #45 pick on a comparatively low ceiling backup OT?

We then give up on him at OT before OTAs are even over and move him into guard?

And just so happens we do it when Harris is finally back to play RT, when we're still running Eric Pears out at LT in practices.

But its all just a sign that they thought Beadles could be a long term OT and that him moving to OG is somehow a sign that the FO screwed the pooch on their evaluations of him and have been forced to shift gears.

Could their be more holes in your argument?

Also, calling any take optimism when you are eternally pessimistic doesn't hold water, FYI.

underrated29
06-09-2010, 11:54 AM
Why not back that up with some logic then champ?

Everyone has seen the guy as a guard with potential OT versatility from day one. McDaniels even referred to him as a OT/OG when they drafted him despite Beadles not playing OG since he was a freshman.

We have two good OTs when healthy, yet we used the #45 pick on a comparatively low ceiling backup OT?

We then give up on him at OT before OTAs are even over and move him into guard?

And just so happens we do it when Harris is finally back to play RT, when we're still running Eric Pears out at LT in practices.

But its all just a sign that they thought Beadles could be a long term OT and that him moving to OG is somehow a sign that the FO screwed the pooch on their evaluations of him and have been forced to shift gears.

Could their be more holes in your argument?

Also, calling any take optimism when you are eternally pessimistic doesn't hold water, FYI.



Think you mean Eric Olsen.... Eric Pears IIRC was cut by shanny played for the raiders and ended up somwhere in like balt or tampa? I think. I hope to god he is not still here.

Drek
06-09-2010, 12:06 PM
Think you mean Eric Olsen.... Eric Pears IIRC was cut by shanny played for the raiders and ended up somwhere in like balt or tampa? I think. I hope to god he is not still here.

Sorry, I actually meant Eric Pears 2.0 - Tyler Polumbus. Tall, weak, no ass OTs who get rag dolled by every powerful end they face.

_Oro_
06-09-2010, 12:16 PM
Didn't read the thread but distinctly remember him being drafted as a guard who can move to RT in a pinch. His arms are too short for tackle IIRC.

Popps
06-09-2010, 12:46 PM
Didn't read the thread but distinctly remember him being drafted as a guard who can move to RT in a pinch. His arms are too short for tackle IIRC.

Same thing I thought. I was assuming he'd be an option at G for us when we drafted him. So, all of this seems fairly logical.

So great to have some new blood on the line.

Bronco Yoda
06-09-2010, 01:05 PM
Beetlejuice...Beetlejuice...Beetlejuice

baja
06-09-2010, 01:26 PM
So what's so hard to understand? They drafted a starting guard that they hope can fill in at the tackle spots if needed so they evaluate what he can do at tackle make their assessments and then move him to guard so to get much needed reps that a rookie starter needs to get to be ready to play.

bowtown
06-09-2010, 01:31 PM
So what's so hard to understand? They drafted a starting guard that they hope can fill in at the tackle spots if needed so they evaluate what he can do at tackle make their assessments and then move him to guard so to get much needed reps that a rookie starter needs to get to be ready to play.

You are supposed to be in Mexico, thinking about your addiction, Mister.

Kaylore
06-09-2010, 01:56 PM
because teams dont spend second round picks to draft backups especially in a very deep draft
plus he wasnt a top tackle prospect for the NFL, he was a guy who was projected by everyone to move to guard or even center once he went pro

Also the "playing multiple positions" thing is hardly unique to Beadles. If you want to make a team as an offensive lineman you pretty much have to play at least two positions on the line unless you're the long snapper.

Hamrob
06-09-2010, 03:18 PM
Versatility is exactly why we drafted this kid. We just had our starting 2 tackles injured and a hole at LG along with an opening at C. We did well with JD to fill one hole and we could plug Beadles in anywhere we needed him.

Dagmar
06-09-2010, 03:20 PM
So what's so hard to understand? They drafted a starting guard that they hope can fill in at the tackle spots if needed so they evaluate what he can do at tackle make their assessments and then move him to guard so to get much needed reps that a rookie starter needs to get to be ready to play.

Well look who's back.

ward63
06-09-2010, 03:23 PM
He may not be starting day one, but I think he will be on day one next year. Plus for whoever said Hochstein will be gone, I completely agree with them.

Taco John
06-09-2010, 04:05 PM
You're killing me with that hateful, blasphemous avatar, baja. It's everything I can do not to punch someone when I see that hideous thing.

Dagmar
06-09-2010, 04:24 PM
You're killing me with that hateful, blasphemous avatar, baja. It's everything I can do not to punch someone when I see that hideous thing.

http://i46.tinypic.com/30a5o5w.jpg

elsid13
06-09-2010, 04:32 PM
I doubt he even see the field this season. Russ Hochstein will be the starting left guard, unless McDaniels decide Hochstein will be the starting center. If the Hochstein moves to center then I am sure one of the veteran FA get the first shot to start.

Drek
06-09-2010, 04:43 PM
I doubt he even see the field this season. Russ Hochstein will be the starting left guard, unless McDaniels decide Hochstein will be the starting center. If the Hochstein moves to center then I am sure one of the veteran FA get the first shot to start.

I don't think anyone even has a shot to knock Walton out of the starting center position. He's a prototypical McDaniels/Belichick/Parcells interior lineman. Grinder with enough physical talent and experience to hold up at the next level early, and the work ethic and football IQ to keep getting better.

Hochstein's days could very well be numbered. He isn't a natural guard or center, he's just a swing guy. When facing younger, more athletic talent he's got a steep hill to climb if he wants to win a starting job.

If the FO is sure they can slide Eric Olsen through to the PS then Hochstein probably stays as the swing interior guy, but only if he shows he's ready by pre-season. Otherwise he might find himself out of a job a whole lot sooner.

fdf
06-10-2010, 11:46 AM
Jay Cutler looks like a fat Jay Cutler looks like a Jay Cutler looks like a TIME TRAVEL

Hmmm. Is there meaning to the fact this post occurred on a thread pertaining to the Beatles? Just compare the haircuts . . .

elsid13
06-10-2010, 03:23 PM
I don't think anyone even has a shot to knock Walton out of the starting center position. He's a prototypical McDaniels/Belichick/Parcells interior lineman. Grinder with enough physical talent and experience to hold up at the next level early, and the work ethic and football IQ to keep getting better.

Hochstein's days could very well be numbered. He isn't a natural guard or center, he's just a swing guy. When facing younger, more athletic talent he's got a steep hill to climb if he wants to win a starting job.

If the FO is sure they can slide Eric Olsen through to the PS then Hochstein probably stays as the swing interior guy, but only if he shows he's ready by pre-season. Otherwise he might find himself out of a job a whole lot sooner.

Go read the SI article, Hochstein knows the system unlike any of the other linemen and that will get him a shot to start. He might be older then the rest, but don't be surprised if they keep him around to mentor the young ones and ensure the line make the right line calls for QB.

randomtask
06-10-2010, 06:46 PM
About time.

fontaine
06-11-2010, 04:13 AM
Go read the SI article, Hochstein knows the system unlike any of the other linemen and that will get him a shot to start. He might be older then the rest, but don't be surprised if they keep him around to mentor the young ones and ensure the line make the right line calls for QB.

Isn't that why we have and OL coach?

I wasn't impressed at all with Hochstein. He was marginally better than Hamilton and that isn't saying much. He may know the system inside out, but that doesn't mean at 33 years with a surgically repaired knee, he should start.

As a matter of fact if Hochstein starts for most of the year then McDaniels seriously screwed up upgrading the OL.

elsid13
06-11-2010, 04:24 AM
Isn't that why we have and OL coach?

I wasn't impressed at all with Hochstein. He was marginally better than Hamilton and that isn't saying much. He may know the system inside out, but that doesn't mean at 33 years with a surgically repaired knee, he should start.

As a matter of fact if Hochstein starts for most of the year then McDaniels seriously screwed up upgrading the OL.

Are the coaches wearing uniforms and on the field during the game? Hochstein is average vet but his understanding of the system give him advantage, and I bet that McDaniels will be more interested in ensuring he has guy on the field executing the right play, before he wants two rookies thinking they know how play works trying to protect Orton.

fontaine
06-11-2010, 04:39 AM
Are the coaches wearing uniforms and on the field during the game? Hochstein is average vet but his understanding of the system give him advantage, and I bet that McDaniels will be more interested in ensuring he has guy on the field executing the right play, before he wants two rookies thinking they know how play works trying to protect Orton.

Did Hochstein's knowledge of the line calls etc stop our interior from sucking both in the run game and protecting the interior last year?

Your post doesn't make any sense considering:

1. Last year the ENTIRE OL were new to the system and Hochstein still didn't start given his understanding of the system.
2. Seth Olsen is in his second year so he also knows the system and is competing for the LG slot.

Like I said, if a backup G like Hochstein who was mediocre to poor last year, 7 months from a ruptured ACL beats a 2nd round G like Beadles AND a 2nd year power blocker like Olsen who was drafted to fit this system, then the FO and McDaniels really, really screwed up upgrading the easiest position along the OL.

elsid13
06-11-2010, 05:00 AM
Did Hochstein's knowledge of the line calls etc stop our interior from sucking both in the run game and protecting the interior last year?

Your post doesn't make any sense considering:

1. Last year the ENTIRE OL were new to the system and Hochstein still didn't start given his understanding of the system.
2. Seth Olsen is in his second year so he also knows the system and is competing for the LG slot.

Like I said, if a backup G like Hochstein who was mediocre to poor last year, 7 months from a ruptured ACL beats a 2nd round G like Beadles AND a 2nd year power blocker like Olsen who was drafted to fit this system, then the FO and McDaniels really, really screwed up upgrading the easiest position along the OL.


I didn't say that Hochstein was any good, just why he wouldn't be cut from the team (like Drek posted) or why he might start over the rookie. While most on the board, think the line is automatically going to better this season, I wouldn't be surprised if it struggle early due to new faces and potential lack of experience at the center slot

fontaine
06-11-2010, 05:09 AM
I didn't say that Hochstein was any good, just why he wouldn't be cut from the team (like Drek posted) or why he might start over the rookie. While most on the board, think the line is automatically going to better this season, I wouldn't be surprised if it struggle early due to new faces and potential lack of experience at the center slot

Well, I don't expect the line to be better initially and I also agree with you that there are going to be problems with breaking in a new C/LG combo.

But ultimately McDaniels had a plan for the OL. We had an established plug and play system here with the OL and zone blocking so when McDaniels took that apart, it was/is up to him to get another system in place to in the very least match the last system.

He hasn't had to do too much to be honest. We were already set with two bookend tackles and Chris Kuper. McDaniels really just had to find a G/C combo and the Guard position is the easiest to fill along the OL.

That's why given the way Hochstein played last year, if he does start for most of the year, it'll mean our FO/McD failed to upgrade the G position in two drafts/offseason's worth of work.

elsid13
06-11-2010, 05:50 AM
Well, I don't expect the line to be better initially and I also agree with you that there are going to be problems with breaking in a new C/LG combo.

But ultimately McDaniels had a plan for the OL. We had an established plug and play system here with the OL and zone blocking so when McDaniels took that apart, it was/is up to him to get another system in place to in the very least match the last system.

He hasn't had to do too much to be honest. We were already set with two bookend tackles and Chris Kuper. McDaniels really just had to find a G/C combo and the Guard position is the easiest to fill along the OL.

That's why given the way Hochstein played last year, if he does start for most of the year, it'll mean our FO/McD failed to upgrade the G position in two drafts/offseason's worth of work.

I understand your point, but the jury is still out if he has the right system, personal or coaches in Denver to have effective line.

fontaine
06-11-2010, 06:44 AM
I understand your point, but the jury is still out if he has the right system, personal or coaches in Denver to have effective line.

Yeah, it's going to be interesting this year because there's a lot of that going on at the WR (Thomas/Gaff/Royal), OLB (Ayers), DB (McBath/Smith), TE (Quinn) and ofcourse OL.

I don't expect all of the moves to pan out but it's important for the franchise that at least two or even three of these moves strike gold because it'll be the difference between moving this team forwards towards getting back to the playoffs or going nowhere and trying to solve the same needs/holes in the team year after year.