PDA

View Full Version : If Champ Leaves, Who do we Target?


schaaf
01-04-2011, 05:17 PM
If we are unable to resign Champ or place the tag on him and he is free to walk...

Who do we target in the draft? Does that now make the secondary a bigger hole on defense than the line?

Agamemnon
01-04-2011, 05:18 PM
Obviously it makes it a bigger hole.

schaaf
01-04-2011, 05:19 PM
bigger than the D-Line?

I think it does I think we would have to go after Peterson if Champ isn't resigned

Likwid Kerruj
01-04-2011, 05:20 PM
Take that money and get 2 solid defensive line guys.

Pressure up front can make up for a lot of shortcomings in the secondary.

BroncoSojia
01-04-2011, 05:24 PM
Take that money and get 2 solid defensive line guys.

Pressure up front can make up for a lot of shortcomings in the secondary.

Cullen Jenkins and Brandon Mebane are going to be Free Agents. Both are good fits for the 3-4 and we should be able to get one of them.

orange crusher
01-04-2011, 05:36 PM
If Champ is gone (and Cox possibly), we'll have a very weak secondary, but our DLine is also very weak. In that scenario, I think you go with the BPA. I think it's easier to get by with lesser corners if you can get to the QB (see Pittsburgh), but if both corner and DLine are glaring weaknesses, I don't see how you can't pick the BPA.

montrose
01-04-2011, 05:52 PM
Champ, Dawkins, Goodman, Hill, McBath, Cox, Thompson and Bruton could all be given their walking papers today...

AND WE SHOULD STILL TARGET FRONT 7.

Houshyamama
01-04-2011, 06:01 PM
Champ, Dawkins, Goodman, Hill, McBath, Cox, Thompson and Bruton could all be given their walking papers today...

AND WE SHOULD STILL TARGET FRONT 7.

I concur.

epicSocialism4tw
01-04-2011, 06:07 PM
Take that money and get 2 solid defensive line guys.

Pressure up front can make up for a lot of shortcomings in the secondary.

Yup.

People dont realize this because they dont watch the subtler aspects of the game, but the games are won in the trenches. If you control the line of scrimmage, you control the whole field.

Its like the game Risk. There are certain territories that if you control, you win the game strategically. The defensive and offensive lines are those territories.

The glory days of the Denver Broncos were had thanks to one of the most dominant offensive lines in NFL history. The glory days of the Chicago Bears and the Baltimore ravens were due to similar situations on the other side of the ball.

Chris
01-04-2011, 06:09 PM
Honestly I haven't seen any mainstream media even suggest we'd take Peterson. It seems to be part of the mane bubble.

boppool
01-04-2011, 07:06 PM
Alfonzo Smith

BroncoSojia
01-04-2011, 07:09 PM
Honestly I haven't seen any mainstream media even suggest we'd take Peterson. It seems to be part of the mane bubble.


Have you seen any of the mocks on Football's Future and Walterfootball? Almost all of them have us taking Peterson with our pick.

TDmvp
01-04-2011, 07:09 PM
If Champ Leaves, Who do we Target?



Ourselves in the head would be a good start...

TheProfessor
01-04-2011, 07:10 PM
Why would we let champ go?

unless something radical changes and the franchise tag goes away he's a bronco as long as we want him.

We need to stop letting talent walk out the door.

epicSocialism4tw
01-04-2011, 07:13 PM
Why would we let champ go?

unless something radical changes and the franchise tag goes away he a bronco as long as we want him.

We need to stop letting talent walk out the door.

Aint that the truth.

Champ wont leave without a franchise tag. That way at least the Broncos get something in return.

LRtagger
01-04-2011, 07:14 PM
Champ, Dawkins, Goodman, Hill, McBath, Cox, Thompson and Bruton could all be given their walking papers today...

AND WE SHOULD STILL TARGET FRONT 7.

We can still target front 7 without using the #2 pick on it.

If Peterson is the best prospect on the board and we need secondary help, you take him.

Bailey, Houston, Crick, Heyward, etc could potentially be there with both of our second round picks. These are VERY good football players.

Pick up a player or two in FA and we are back in business.

broncosteven
01-04-2011, 07:15 PM
Yup.

People dont realize this because they dont watch the subtler aspects of the game, but the games are won in the trenches. If you control the line of scrimmage, you control the whole field.

Its like the game Risk. There are certain territories that if you control, you win the game strategically. The defensive and offensive lines are those territories.

The glory days of the Denver Broncos were had thanks to one of the most dominant offensive lines in NFL history. The glory days of the Chicago Bears and the Baltimore ravens were due to similar situations on the other side of the ball.

I agree, if Champ decides to move on we should draft the best NT/DE, S, OL (depth) then worry about CB's later.

We still have Goodman, and Cox (if he can stay out of jail). If we are flat out desperate bring back Dawkins for one last year for depth.

Picking the top CB in the draft would be a mistake if they don't get a top DL 1st.

Either way to sort out all the problems on this team it is going to take a good 2 offseasons to bring in some real players.

Dedhed
01-04-2011, 07:26 PM
Honestly I haven't seen any mainstream media even suggest we'd take Peterson.

Shouldn't that tell you something?

http://www.squidoo.com/NFL_Mock_Draft

http://www.fftoolbox.com/nfl_draft/2011/2011-nfl-mock-draft.cfm?writer=22

http://www.fftoolbox.com/nfl_draft/2011/2011-nfl-mock-draft.cfm?writer=48

http://www.fftoolbox.com/nfl_draft/2011/2011-nfl-mock-draft.cfm?writer=28

http://newnfldraft.com/

http://walterfootball.com/draft2011.php

All of these are far better resources than any "Mainstream Media". Mel Kiper is employed by mainstream media.

DarkHorse
01-04-2011, 07:47 PM
Peterson whether Champ stays or not.


None of you 'knowledgeable' (IMO) guys have led me to believe that there's a player ready to drop right into the 3-4, that i'm assuming we'll stick with, for the D-line that is worth the #2 pick.

I've heard Bowers, Fairley, etc... but there always seems to be a negative against that person at #2. One isn't a 3-4 guy, the other guy can be had at 10 or wherever, this guy is a DT but needs to be DE in 3-4, etc..

That's not safe enough for that high of a position. I'll roll the dice with the once in a decade (so i'm told) corner that could be a Pro Bowler at CB or S (again, so i've been told)

So that being the case I take Peterson because he can still fill a need. Use the 2nd round picks where there are more guys clear cut at that pick for the d-line.

broncosteven
01-04-2011, 08:13 PM
Peterson whether Champ stays or not.


None of you 'knowledgeable' (IMO) guys have led me to believe that there's a player ready to drop right into the 3-4, that i'm assuming we'll stick with, for the D-line that is worth the #2 pick.

I've heard Bowers, Fairley, etc... but there always seems to be a negative against that person at #2. One isn't a 3-4 guy, the other guy can be had at 10 or wherever, this guy is a DT but needs to be DE in 3-4, etc..

That's not safe enough for that high of a position. I'll roll the dice with the once in a decade (so i'm told) corner that could be a Pro Bowler at CB or S (again, so i've been told)

So that being the case I take Peterson because he can still fill a need. Use the 2nd round picks where there are more guys clear cut at that pick for the d-line.

But we have been trying to land a guy to replace Champ since forever, DWill, Phonz, not to mention the FA's like Bly and Law. Goodman is good enough, let Cox and Squid fight it out for #2 and hope we can build up the trenches so they don't have to cover long enough to get burned every snap.

FireFly
01-04-2011, 10:47 PM
Ok - silly questions, but I'm out of the Broncos loop since McD got fired.

What happened to Perrish Cox?

Or DJ Williams for that matter? They both had legal issues?

epicSocialism4tw
01-04-2011, 10:51 PM
Ok - silly questions, but I'm out of the Broncos loop since McD got fired.

What happened to Perrish Cox?

Or DJ Williams for that matter? They both had legal issues?

Cox just up and took off one night. Nobody knows where he is, but there are rumors that he's living in Cuernavaca under the name "Tom Honduras".

DJ Williams quit football and decided to move into a hippie commune in Oregon that makes and sells instructional Sasquatch communication technique VHS videos. He changed his name to "Willflower".

tsiguy96
01-04-2011, 10:52 PM
dline so it doesnt matter near as much who your corners are

NFLBRONCO
01-04-2011, 10:58 PM
Whether its Peterson Bowers Etc we need to hit jackpot heck with arguing over biggest need. We blow this selection its another huge setback something we don't need.

Broncos_OTM
01-04-2011, 11:11 PM
Trade down or take peterson. We need depth and we need somuch its just pathetic

DarkHorse
01-04-2011, 11:40 PM
But we have been trying to land a guy to replace Champ since forever, DWill, Phonz, not to mention the FA's like Bly and Law. Goodman is good enough, let Cox and Squid fight it out for #2 and hope we can build up the trenches so they don't have to cover long enough to get burned every snap.

I know, kinda damned if we do, damned if we don't.


I'd rather not reach for a D-line guy that either needs work to fit our system, is a reach at #2 or needs converted to fit our need. From what i've been reading from members far more versed in the college world than I, is that there is no actual #2 that can plug right into our system without either reaching or having to change his position, that's why i'd rather take a 'can't miss' guy like Peterson and use the 2nd round picks to shore up the D-line. Again, from members here there appears to be a very deep group of 2nd rounders that will be available and we have 2 to use.

serious hops
01-05-2011, 12:15 AM
Sign a solid corner like Jonathon Joseph in free agency, then trade back at least once and target the best two or three defensive linemen left on the board that fit whatever scheme we're going to run. And we really need a safety somewhere in the first three rounds as well.

Doggcow
01-05-2011, 12:15 AM
Champ, Dawkins, Goodman, Hill, McBath, Cox, Thompson and Bruton could all be given their walking papers today...

AND WE SHOULD STILL TARGET FRONT 7.

McBath and Squid Thompson better stay. They are solid players.

cutthemdown
01-05-2011, 12:23 AM
I don't see how what we do with Champ changes the draft. You need 2 good corners and another couple decent ones for a good defense so if you think Peterson the best football player available at 2 you take regardless if Champ stays or goes.

cutthemdown
01-05-2011, 12:24 AM
Sign a solid corner like Jonathon Joseph in free agency, then trade back at least once and target the best two or three defensive linemen left on the board that fit whatever scheme we're going to run. And we really need a safety somewhere in the first three rounds as well.

Broncos have so many holes i think saftey could maybe be filled in FA as a stop gap thing. Not saying don't draft one but when you have about 10-12 new starters needed no one draft can fill it up.

DefensiveBehavior
01-05-2011, 01:29 AM
Take that money and get 2 solid defensive line guys.

Pressure up front can make up for a lot of shortcomings in the secondary.

I suppose 2 stud DT's will just be waiting for us in the middle of rounds 1-2 like they have been for years.....

You dont trade a #2 pick for a garbage midrounder when the talent level is for the most part watered down and equal...

DefensiveBehavior
01-05-2011, 01:31 AM
Denver passes on peterson,i will laugh,and look forward to another **** show on the Dline....none of these bums are suh...pull it together!

oubronco
01-05-2011, 07:13 AM
Just fix the damn d-line for a change

oubronco
01-05-2011, 07:25 AM
McBath and Squid Thompson better stay. They are solid players.

What have you seen from McBath that would make you say this?

He can't stay on the field cause he's always injured

Old Dude
01-05-2011, 07:55 AM
In 2009 this defense ranked #7 in yards allowed and #10 in sacking the opposing QB.

In 2010 we slipped to 32 and 32.

Did our defensive line deteriorate that much in just one year? Of course it didn't. Williams is better than Fields. Bannon is at least as good if not better than Peterson. Vickerson isn't that much worse than Holliday.

We all know what happened. Dumervil missed the season.

We absolutely, positively need depth on the defensive line. It would be wonderful to get an impact player there. I won't be upset if we do.

But our secondary is in a world of hurt. Even if Champ stays, it's old and fragile and Cox is not the answer. If Patrick Peterson is everything he's purported to be, we'd be fools to pass on him.

It's a huge position of need - maybe our biggest need - and here's a once-in-a-generation freak who drops right in our laps. Are you kidding me?

We don't have to neglect the defensive line. We have two high 2d round picks and a high third to develop all kinds of depth there.

Rohirrim
01-05-2011, 08:07 AM
In 2009 this defense ranked #7 in yards allowed and #10 in sacking the opposing QB.

In 2010 we slipped to 32 and 32.

Did our defensive line deteriorate that much in just one year? Of course it didn't. Williams is better than Fields. Bannon is at least as good if not better than Peterson. Vickerson isn't that much worse than Holliday.

We all know what happened. Dumervil missed the season.

We absolutely, positively need depth on the defensive line. It would be wonderful to get an impact player there. I won't be upset if we do.

But our secondary is in a world of hurt. Even if Champ stays, it's old and fragile and Cox is not the answer. If Patrick Peterson is everything he's purported to be, we'd be fools to pass on him.

It's a huge position of need - maybe our biggest need - and here's a once-in-a-generation freak who drops right in our laps. Are you kidding me?

We don't have to neglect the defensive line. We have two high 2d round picks and a high third to develop all kinds of depth there.

And we're not going to fix all of this in one off-season. Anybody who thinks we will is fooling themselves. First, the team needs to decide its philosophy. What offense will we run with Tebow? What defense will we run? Then, start with the lines. The Oline is in better shape than the Dline. I expect Walton and Beadles will improve. Olines generally improve the more time they have together. But we still need at least a back up right tackle, if not an upgrade, given Harris' injury history. We should bring in a guard as well.

The Dline (IMO) could be vastly improved with the addition of one, dominating DE - Nick Fairley. With Doom coming back, that would make a huge improvement on the entire defense. The addition of a CB, even Peterson, would have little effect. We don't have many picks. Have to make them count. Start with the lines.

mikey555
01-05-2011, 08:33 AM
Peterson is the man or the Divot as my oldest son likes to call him... we can pick d-line wit the 2 2nd rounders and still make out like bandits!!!

JDub15
01-05-2011, 08:39 AM
Patrick Peterson should be the choice regardless if Champ stays or not. He will be as impacting as N. Suh was for the Detroit. You could call him the Suh of defensive backs. The guy is absurd. He can play S or CB, can return punts, and even play wildcat QB.

People don't seem to realize that without a good backfield, almost no amount of pass rush will compensate.

Minnesota has one of the best defensive lines in the league, and has had a below average pass defense the last 2 years.

Detroit is in the top 10 for adjusted sack rate (7.7%) and has a terrible pass defense.

Pittsburgh's pass defense, despite having two of the best OLBs in the game, regressed to league average last year without Troy Polamalu.

Dallas has two great pass rushing OLBs, a nice D-line, and a disruptive nose tackle... they are a bottom 5 pass defense because of poor coverage.

Meanwhile the Broncos last year had a top 5 pass defense with one legitimate pass rusher.

We should draft BPA - BPA is undoubtedly Patrick Peterson.

Old Dude
01-05-2011, 08:47 AM
My reasoning goes like this.

1. We have to stick with the 3-4. If we don't, then (a) we are wasting the best defensive player on the whole squad (Dumervil) and (b) we are making the rebuilding job twice as hard because we have to cut loose J. Williams, Vickerson and Hunter. None of them would fit in a 4-3. We go even further into the free agency bust hole. Not only that, but we have to come up with at least 6 players to fill the rotation. The only holdovers would be Bannon and Thomas. People who think that Ayers is going to step in as an every down DE are just dreaming. That's just begging for a repeat of the Jarvis Moss debacle - in reverse.

2. If we stick with the 3-4 our biggest need is a nose tackle to spell and eventually take over for Williams. We are not going to get that much of an improved pass rush from a 3-4 DE. What we need is quality depth and we can get that in the second round, or by trading up into the late first round.

3. I understand the argument that a great front-7 can make a poor secondary look average, or an average secondary look very good. But I've also seen too many games where we've had a decent pass rush and still got blown out when our rookie or incompetent corners got torched again and again and again.

If we had a DL freak sitting there at #2 - - someone like Suh - - then I could see it. But he's not there. Instead we have 3 or 4 "pretty good" prospects - any one of whom can easily bust. We cannot afford a bust on the #2 pick.

I say we take the best defensive player available and if that's a corner, so be it.

OrangeSe7en
01-05-2011, 08:50 AM
My reasoning goes like this.

1. We have to stick with the 3-4. If we don't, then (a) we are wasting the best defensive player on the whole squad (Dumervil) and (b) we are making the rebuilding job twice as hard because we have to cut loose J. Williams, Vickerson and Hunter. None of them would fit in a 4-3. We go even further into the free agency bust hole. Not only that, but we have to come up with at least 6 players to fill the rotation. The only holdovers would be Bannon and Thomas. People who think that Ayers is going to step in as an every down DE are just dreaming. That's just begging for a repeat of the Jarvis Moss debacle - in reverse.

2. If we stick with the 3-4 our biggest need is a nose tackle to spell and eventually take over for Williams. We are not going to get that much of an improved pass rush from a 3-4 DE. What we need is quality depth and we can get that in the second round, or by trading up into the late first round.

3. I understand the argument that a great front-7 can make a poor secondary look average, or an average secondary look very good. But I've also seen too many games where we've had a decent pass rush and still got blown out when our rookie or incompetent corners got torched again and again and again.

If we had a DL freak sitting there at #2 - - someone like Suh - - then I could see it. But he's not there. Instead we have 3 or 4 "pretty good" prospects - any one of whom can easily bust. We cannot afford a bust on the #2 pick.

I say we take the best defensive player available and if that's a corner, so be it.

Two of the guys theyre interviewing are 4-3 defensive coordinators. Even Mularkey comes from a 4-3 teams but who knows with him. Nolan would be nice but who knows.

Dedhed
01-05-2011, 08:52 AM
Patrick Peterson should be the choice regardless if Champ stays or not. He will be as impacting as N. Suh was for the Detroit. You could call him the Suh of defensive backs. The guy is absurd. He can play S or CB, can return punts, and even play wildcat QB.

People don't seem to realize that without a good backfield, almost no amount of pass rush will compensate.

Minnesota has one of the best defensive lines in the league, and has had a below average pass defense the last 2 years.

Detroit is in the top 10 for adjusted sack rate (7.7%) and has a terrible pass defense.

Pittsburgh's pass defense, despite having two of the best OLBs in the game, regressed to league average last year without Troy Polamalu.

Dallas has two great pass rushing OLBs, a nice D-line, and a disruptive nose tackle... they are a bottom 5 pass defense because of poor coverage.

Meanwhile the Broncos last year had a top 5 pass defense with one legitimate pass rusher.

We should draft BPA - BPA is undoubtedly Patrick Peterson.
All of this.

In any draft there are only 1-2 marquis guys and then a hundred+ guys who you can turn into great players with coaching and scheme.

When you have a chance to draft one of those Marquis guys you do it. You don't pass that up to take one of the 100+ who might be great if they fit your scheme and take to your coaching.

Luck and Peterson are the marquis guys this year.

JDub15
01-05-2011, 08:57 AM
My reasoning goes like this.

1. We have to stick with the 3-4. If we don't, then (a) we are wasting the best defensive player on the whole squad (Dumervil) and (b) we are making the rebuilding job twice as hard because we have to cut loose J. Williams, Vickerson and Hunter. None of them would fit in a 4-3. We go even further into the free agency bust hole. Not only that, but we have to come up with at least 6 players to fill the rotation. The only holdovers would be Bannon and Thomas. People who think that Ayers is going to step in as an every down DE are just dreaming. That's just begging for a repeat of the Jarvis Moss debacle - in reverse.

2. If we stick with the 3-4 our biggest need is a nose tackle to spell and eventually take over for Williams. We are not going to get that much of an improved pass rush from a 3-4 DE. What we need is quality depth and we can get that in the second round, or by trading up into the late first round.

3. I understand the argument that a great front-7 can make a poor secondary look average, or an average secondary look very good. But I've also seen too many games where we've had a decent pass rush and still got blown out when our rookie or incompetent corners got torched again and again and again.

If we had a DL freak sitting there at #2 - - someone like Suh - - then I could see it. But he's not there. Instead we have 3 or 4 "pretty good" prospects - any one of whom can easily bust. We cannot afford a bust on the #2 pick.

I say we take the best defensive player available and if that's a corner, so be it.

Good Post! Agreed!

Rohirrim
01-05-2011, 08:58 AM
Simple formula: Does Peterson or Champ or Revis make their Dline better?

Nope.

Will Fairley make our secondary better?

Yep.

JDub15
01-05-2011, 09:05 AM
Simple formula: Does Peterson or Champ or Revis make their Dline better?

Nope.

Will Fairley make our secondary better?

Yep.

Obviously you're not grasping the concept, the answer to does Revis make their Dline better is yes... better coverage allows more time to rush the passer just as better pass rush allows the corners to be able to cover for shorter amounts of time.

Ever heard of a "coverage sack"

This isn't exactly rocket science :)

gyldenlove
01-05-2011, 09:10 AM
Defensive line, the Steelers have proven time and again that a great defensive front can make up for having the 3 stooges in the secondary.

We need pressure and we need to stop the run, a cornerback is not going to do that, drafting a CB now is like trying to build the roof before you poor the foundation, it might work but it is probably going to end up in a horrible mess. Fix the foundation first, then get working on the rest of the house.

OrangeSe7en
01-05-2011, 09:13 AM
Obviously you're not grasping the concept, the answer to does Revis make their Dline better is yes... better coverage allows more time to rush the passer just as better pass rush allows the corners to be able to cover for shorter amounts of time.

Ever heard of a "coverage sack"

This isn't exactly rocket science :)

You must not have been watching the past 3 years.

Rohirrim
01-05-2011, 09:16 AM
Obviously you're not grasping the concept, the answer to does Revis make their Dline better is yes... better coverage allows more time to rush the passer just as better pass rush allows the corners to be able to cover for shorter amounts of time.

Ever heard of a "coverage sack"

This isn't exactly rocket science :)

And how many game changing INTs and fumbles do great pass rushers create?

Likwid Kerruj
01-05-2011, 09:29 AM
With the way the passing rules are, you can't breathe on a receiver without drawing a flag.

Look at the teams in the playoffs.

Most if not all are pretty damn good up front.

Old Dude
01-05-2011, 10:34 AM
Four of the the top five defenses in the NFL use a 3-4 alignment. Not surprisingly, the outside linebackers on those teams are the ones with the most sacks. And on average the LB corps have almost 3 times as many sacks as the defensive lines. That's how those teams are built and that is the strategy.

Virtually all of those teams have solid nose tackles and outside linebackers. Hardly any of them busted the bank on their 3-4 DEs.

maven
01-05-2011, 10:37 AM
Where's the trade up or select Luck option?

JDub15
01-05-2011, 10:53 AM
Most great defenses have at least one elite DB... Revis, Polomalu, Reed, Tramon Williams (GB), etc.

Even if you think we should start building the defense from the front 7 - you can't pass up one of the drafts few elite players to do so.

You have to draft BPA, if you pass up better players to draft for "need" you will be back drafting for "need" year after year. Like when Shannan "fixed" the defense with the excellent draft of Jarvis Moss, Tim Crowder, etc.

We need linemen more, but passing up a franchise DB to get them would be foolish.

Rohirrim
01-05-2011, 10:56 AM
Four of the the top five defenses in the NFL use a 3-4 alignment. Not surprisingly, the outside linebackers on those teams are the ones with the most sacks. And on average the LB corps have almost 3 times as many sacks as the defensive lines. That's how those teams are built and that is the strategy.

Virtually all of those teams have solid nose tackles and outside linebackers. Hardly any of them busted the bank on their 3-4 DEs.

I guess it depends who the coach is going to be, and what the scheme is. If we're going to run some kind of hybrid, it stretches out the list of guys you can draft. If it's going to be a stock 3-4 or 4-3, that narrows it down some.

JDub15
01-05-2011, 10:59 AM
Wouldn't you all agree that KC would trade Tyson Jackson DE (#3 overall) for Vonte Davis CB (#25 Overall)?

Clear case of a team passing on better players to draft for need and add to the vaunted front 7.

uplink
01-05-2011, 11:09 AM
thanks for putting Peterson 1st in the poll so I didn't have to look down any further

gyldenlove
01-05-2011, 11:20 AM
Most great defenses have at least one elite DB... Revis, Polomalu, Reed, Tramon Williams (GB), etc.

Even if you think we should start building the defense from the front 7 - you can't pass up one of the drafts few elite players to do so.

You have to draft BPA, if you pass up better players to draft for "need" you will be back drafting for "need" year after year. Like when Shannan "fixed" the defense with the excellent draft of Jarvis Moss, Tim Crowder, etc.

We need linemen more, but passing up a franchise DB to get them would be foolish.

All elite defenses have multiple good players on the defensive front. BPA is the most ridiculous concept ever devised, how do you determine who the best player is? at any given point in the draft you could make an argument for between 3 and 10 players being the best, how do you evaluate it?

Is a guy who is an amazing TE better than a guy who is a good LT because LT is more important than TE? What about the best kicker in the draft, does he rank as high as the best LB in the draft?

You draft the player that makes sense, does it make sense for us to draft a WR? I don't think so. Does it make sense to draft a defensive player? I think so. If you think Dareus is one of the 5 best players in the draft, he is worth a number 2 pick, if you think Peterson is worth a top 5 pick, then he is worth a number 2 pick - but can you compare them in any meaningful way?

To me what you have to look at is how do we improve the team as much as possible? We do that by adding a player who is better than what we have or will have - to do that you need to evaluate if we in the foresee-able future will be weak at a given position that we have the option of drafting - and what players do we consider to be good enough to be drafted at that given position.

Rascal
01-05-2011, 11:22 AM
I think I would take Peterson regardless of Champ being here or not. He is the best player on defense in the draft and also a position of need. There isn't another 3-4 defensive player worthy of a #2 pick.

JDub15
01-05-2011, 11:29 AM
All elite defenses have multiple good players on the defensive front. BPA is the most ridiculous concept ever devised, how do you determine who the best player is? at any given point in the draft you could make an argument for between 3 and 10 players being the best, how do you evaluate it?

Is a guy who is an amazing TE better than a guy who is a good LT because LT is more important than TE? What about the best kicker in the draft, does he rank as high as the best LB in the draft?

You draft the player that makes sense, does it make sense for us to draft a WR? I don't think so. Does it make sense to draft a defensive player? I think so. If you think Dareus is one of the 5 best players in the draft, he is worth a number 2 pick, if you think Peterson is worth a top 5 pick, then he is worth a number 2 pick - but can you compare them in any meaningful way?

To me what you have to look at is how do we improve the team as much as possible? We do that by adding a player who is better than what we have or will have - to do that you need to evaluate if we in the foresee-able future will be weak at a given position that we have the option of drafting - and what players do we consider to be good enough to be drafted at that given position.

That's why GM's get paid the big bucks. This is precisely what a draft board does. Teams will value positions differently, the Colts value DE's more than say, OLBs, the Steelers value OLBs more than say, CBs. The Raiders like punters :)

But every player of very position ends up on the draft board, and that's the primary determination used to make draft selections. Maybe needs are already factored in, maybe not.

I like Dareus a lot and will not be unhappy if the Broncos take him, but I still think Peterson is the better choice.

"Needs" change so vastly from year to year that IMO BPA is the only viable long-term strategy.

Old Dude
01-05-2011, 01:37 PM
Factoid. 4 of the five top defenses run 3-4 alignments. San Diego, Pittsburgh, Green Bay and New England.

Who are these teams starting at defense ends and where were those people drafted?

The players are:

Ziggy Hood (drafted 32d)
Brett Keisel (drafted 242d) 7th round


Gerard Warren (drafted 3d) remember him?
Mike Wright (undrafted)

Jacques Cesaire (undrafted)
Luis Castillo (28th pick)

Ryan Pickett (29th overall)
Cullen Jenkins (undrafted)

- - - - -

Of all those guys, only Warren was a top ten draft pick. And the fact is that he was long considered a disappointment in Cleveland where he was drafted. We had him here and cut him loose.

None of the other seven players were drafted any earlier than 28th. Three of the seven weren't drafted at all.

OrangeSe7en
01-05-2011, 01:43 PM
I think I would take Peterson regardless of Champ being here or not. He is the best player on defense in the draft and also a position of need. There isn't another 3-4 defensive player worthy of a #2 pick.

Then they should just trade down because getting a DB is not the answer.

gyldenlove
01-05-2011, 01:50 PM
That's why GM's get paid the big bucks. This is precisely what a draft board does. Teams will value positions differently, the Colts value DE's more than say, OLBs, the Steelers value OLBs more than say, CBs. The Raiders like punters :)

But every player of very position ends up on the draft board, and that's the primary determination used to make draft selections. Maybe needs are already factored in, maybe not.

I like Dareus a lot and will not be unhappy if the Broncos take him, but I still think Peterson is the better choice.

"Needs" change so vastly from year to year that IMO BPA is the only viable long-term strategy.

That to me is why BPA is an empty term, no singular value exists to evaluate if a player is the best available. Really what is meant is that a team should draft the player who is top on their board, but even that is not a great way to go being that you only get to work out so many players.

I guess the good thing for us is that we just have to work out 2 guys, since one of them is guaranteed to be there when we draft.

Peterson is a good choice, I would be happy to see him, but we have been neglecting that damn defensive line for so long you can dig up 5.25 inch floppy disks with people ranting about it. We need to bite the bullet and get it over with, even the Chiefs are winning games with top pick defensive line men now - if that is not argument enough that it works then I don't know what is.

gyldenlove
01-05-2011, 01:55 PM
Factoid. 4 of the five top defenses run 3-4 alignments. San Diego, Pittsburgh, Green Bay and New England.

Who are these teams starting at defense ends and where were those people drafted?

The players are:

Ziggy Hood (drafted 32d)
Brett Keisel (drafted 242d) 7th round


Gerard Warren (drafted 3d) remember him?
Mike Wright (undrafted)

Jacques Cesaire (undrafted)
Luis Castillo (28th pick)

Ryan Pickett (29th overall)
Cullen Jenkins (undrafted)

- - - - -

Of all those guys, only Warren was a top ten draft pick. And the fact is that he was long considered a disappointment in Cleveland where he was drafted. We had him here and cut him loose.

None of the other seven players were drafted any earlier than 28th. Three of the seven weren't drafted at all.

So that is 50% of the defensive ends are 1st round picks, if you consider the NTs of those 4 teams, BJ Raji, Ty Warren and Casey Hampton are all 1st round picks (all drafted in top 20) and Garay is undrafted I think.

That means of 12 defensive linemen, 7 (58%) are drafted in round 1. Do people still think we can get away with drafting defensive linemen late? We need talent on that line and we have been needing it for many many years.

JDub15
01-05-2011, 01:56 PM
That to me is why BPA is an empty term, no singular value exists to evaluate if a player is the best available. Really what is meant is that a team should draft the player who is top on their board, but even that is not a great way to go being that you only get to work out so many players.

I guess the good thing for us is that we just have to work out 2 guys, since one of them is guaranteed to be there when we draft.

Peterson is a good choice, I would be happy to see him, but we have been neglecting that damn defensive line for so long you can dig up 5.25 inch floppy disks with people ranting about it. We need to bite the bullet and get it over with, even the Chiefs are winning games with top pick defensive line men now - if that is not argument enough that it works then I don't know what is.

Agreed it would be hard for many of the fans to swallow, but with two second round picks and a very deep class of DEs/DTs, grabbing Peterson and then spending 2nd round picks on the line would be a great draft.

And Tyson Jackson is average at best, he's a mediocre run defender and a poor pass rusher and was not even remotely worth the 3rd overall pick. The KC defenses has eroded over the second half of the season. Dareus will be better than Tyson Jackson, but still I think Peterson is the guy.

JDub15
01-05-2011, 02:01 PM
So that is 50% of the defensive ends are 1st round picks, if you consider the NTs of those 4 teams, BJ Raji, Ty Warren and Casey Hampton are all 1st round picks (all drafted in top 20) and Garay is undrafted I think.

That means of 12 defensive linemen, 7 (58%) are drafted in round 1. Do people still think we can get away with drafting defensive linemen late? We need talent on that line and we have been needing it for many many years.

Hood is only playing because Aaron Smith is hurt. Hood has arguably been one of the worst 3-4 DEs in the entire league this year. Profootballfocus - who grades every player on every play, has him second to last among starters, close to Ryan McBeam (LOL). Smith was drafted in the 4th round.

Castillo had a few good seasons but has been mediocre at best the last 2 years. Garay was a revelation at NT this year.

I'll give you that Pickett is a good player - I don't think there is any magic recipe to building a great defense, just draft the best player available.

FWIW - I was lobbying hard for NT Dan Williams last year, who's played great in Arizona this season.

Old Dude
01-05-2011, 02:06 PM
So that is 50% of the defensive ends are 1st round picks, if you consider the NTs of those 4 teams, BJ Raji, Ty Warren and Casey Hampton are all 1st round picks (all drafted in top 20) and Garay is undrafted I think.

That means of 12 defensive linemen, 7 (58%) are drafted in round 1. Do people still think we can get away with drafting defensive linemen late? We need talent on that line and we have been needing it for many many years.

I think you missed the whole point. Not one of the guys under discussion in this thread plays nose tackle. The top NT in the draft is Paea, who is projected to go between 15 and 30. The next two are probably Taylor and Powe and we could get either of them with a 2d round pick.

Of the defensive ends, only one was a top ten pick. Three weren't drafted at all and one was a 7th rounder.

We do not have to spend the number two pick on a defensive end unless we decide to start from scratch and go to a 4-3. If we do that, then we better get Dumervil up on the trading block ASAP, because he'd be worthless to us.

epicSocialism4tw
01-05-2011, 02:34 PM
Most great defenses have at least one elite DB... Revis, Polomalu, Reed, Tramon Williams (GB), etc.

Even if you think we should start building the defense from the front 7 - you can't pass up one of the drafts few elite players to do so.

You have to draft BPA, if you pass up better players to draft for "need" you will be back drafting for "need" year after year. Like when Shannan "fixed" the defense with the excellent draft of Jarvis Moss, Tim Crowder, etc.

We need linemen more, but passing up a franchise DB to get them would be foolish.

We already have a "franchise DB" on this team, and have had him for years.

He has covered up for alot of flaws, but he has also proven that there's no such thing as a "franchise DB". If the QB has all day to sit back and pick on everyone else (ahem...Foxworth), then you lose.

I am fine with the Broncos picking Peterson IF they actually sign a real DT and another real DE.

The crappy thing about Peterson is that he may play safety here, and do you really want to expend the #2 pick on a safety?

Old Dude
01-05-2011, 03:42 PM
Why on earth would they play Peterson at Safety?

For the record, I agree this team needs lots of help on the front 7. I just think that we'll see less of a drop-off from Bowers to the kinds of DLs who will be available early in the 2d than we would see from Peterson to the kinds of CBs who would be available in the 2d.

I could see an argument for dropping a few spots and picking up two blue chip defensive linemen in the first round (provided Paea was one of them.) But I don't think we'll be able to pull that off.

And I think a lot of people underestimate just how bad our secondary really is right now.

I still remember the late 60s and early 70s when we had a pretty good defensive line. Tombstone Jackson. Dave Costa. Paul Smith. And we STILL got torched on a regular basis. And that was long before the game was changed to make the passing attack even more effective.

Mr. Elway
01-05-2011, 03:51 PM
I think the key here is long term vision. Long term, we want a solid 3-4 defense with at least one or two elite players. It doesn't really matter what position the elite players are in, provided the entire defense is solid. The only way to build a solid roster is to have a consistently good GM. The only way to get elite players is to grab them fast when you have the opportunity. This year's opportunity is Peterson, so we must draft him. It's up to the GM to use the remaining picks to draft solid starters for other positions.

OrangeSe7en
01-05-2011, 03:56 PM
I think the key here is long term vision. Long term, we want a solid 3-4 defense with at least one or two elite players. It doesn't really matter what position the elite players are in, provided the entire defense is solid. The only way to build a solid roster is to have a consistently good GM. The only way to get elite players is to grab them fast when you have the opportunity. This year's opportunity is Peterson, so we must draft him. It's up to the GM to use the remaining picks to draft solid starters for other positions.

A DB isnt the answer.

tsiguy96
01-05-2011, 03:58 PM
We already have a "franchise DB" on this team, and have had him for years.

He has covered up for alot of flaws, but he has also proven that there's no such thing as a "franchise DB". If the QB has all day to sit back and pick on everyone else (ahem...Foxworth), then you lose.


exactly. all an elite CB can do is make the game 10 vs 10, and if your other 10 are still no good it doesnt matter.

schaaf
01-05-2011, 03:59 PM
what about having peterson at one corner letting Cox ( if not in prison) and Goodman play the opposite side and then if Champ is resigned move him to safety this year?

JDub15
01-05-2011, 04:15 PM
I think the key here is long term vision. Long term, we want a solid 3-4 defense with at least one or two elite players. It doesn't really matter what position the elite players are in, provided the entire defense is solid. The only way to build a solid roster is to have a consistently good GM. The only way to get elite players is to grab them fast when you have the opportunity. This year's opportunity is Peterson, so we must draft him. It's up to the GM to use the remaining picks to draft solid starters for other positions.

This!!

Mr. Elway
01-05-2011, 04:52 PM
A DB isnt the answer.

OK, but I'm not sure what you mean by "the answer." My proposed strategy involves specifically not keying in on particular one position as the key. The whole roster must be solid, and one or two positions must be elite. Exactly what positions those are is not important - a coach should be able to game plan to his team's strengths and talents.

OrangeSe7en
01-05-2011, 05:17 PM
OK, but I'm not sure what you mean by "the answer." My proposed strategy involves specifically not keying in on particular one position as the key. The whole roster must be solid, and one or two positions must be elite. Exactly what positions those are is not important - a coach should be able to game plan to his team's strengths and talents.

A DB isn't the answer.

gyldenlove
01-05-2011, 05:23 PM
Agreed it would be hard for many of the fans to swallow, but with two second round picks and a very deep class of DEs/DTs, grabbing Peterson and then spending 2nd round picks on the line would be a great draft.

And Tyson Jackson is average at best, he's a mediocre run defender and a poor pass rusher and was not even remotely worth the 3rd overall pick. The KC defenses has eroded over the second half of the season. Dareus will be better than Tyson Jackson, but still I think Peterson is the guy.

I wouldn't mind that draft at all, I would still prefer trading back a bit and gettting a 1st round DT, but other than that I must say Peterson is my prefered option at number 2.

Tyson Jackson is a stooge, and I am thankful for that, Glenn Dorsey has come to life a bit though and he was a number 5 pick I think.

If we stay with the 3-4 I would prefer Dareus, if we go back to 4-3 I would be in favor of Fairley if we trade into that 5-10 range. If we go lower I would like Paea.

gyldenlove
01-05-2011, 05:26 PM
I think the key here is long term vision. Long term, we want a solid 3-4 defense with at least one or two elite players. It doesn't really matter what position the elite players are in, provided the entire defense is solid. The only way to build a solid roster is to have a consistently good GM. The only way to get elite players is to grab them fast when you have the opportunity. This year's opportunity is Peterson, so we must draft him. It's up to the GM to use the remaining picks to draft solid starters for other positions.

Here is the problem: If you keep grabbing elite players that do not play with DL, you are going to keep getting new defensive coordinators and switch system. We have switched defensive coordinator EVERY year for 5 consecutive years and you can smack my ass and call me Susan if we don't do so again as soon we hire a new HC - and the only reason we have done so other than Nolan is because none of them were able to get anything out of a talentless defensive line.

Garcia Bronco
01-05-2011, 05:32 PM
If we are unable to resign Champ or place the tag on him and he is free to walk...

Who do we target in the draft? Does that now make the secondary a bigger hole on defense than the line?

Defensive line is where we target.

Mr. Elway
01-05-2011, 07:34 PM
Here is the problem: If you keep grabbing elite players that do not play with DL, you are going to keep getting new defensive coordinators and switch system. We have switched defensive coordinator EVERY year for 5 consecutive years and you can smack my ass and call me Susan if we don't do so again as soon we hire a new HC - and the only reason we have done so other than Nolan is because none of them were able to get anything out of a talentless defensive line.

I hear your point, and if we were to trade down to build the DL I would be OK with that. I would prefer we get Peterson specifically (not just any DB) because I believe he will be an exceptional player, and I don't see any DL talent on that same level in this draft that would warrant a #2. I think that when it comes to elite players, opportunities are few and far between, so you can't afford to also expect to find them in the "right" positions. If Champ were 5 years younger I would say without hesitation that Peterson is the wrong choice, but 3 years from now (maybe sooner) we don't have an elite CB any more and we might wish we had a guy like Peterson.

I completely agree about needing continuity at DC though, and think that we need to outline a clear strategy and set reasonable goals to getting there, giving a DC the appropriate leeway to acquire players and teach them the system.

Mr. Elway
01-05-2011, 07:34 PM
A DB isn't the answer.

Thanks, much clearer and more convincing the second time.

LRtagger
01-05-2011, 07:36 PM
http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/2010/writers/cory_mccartney/09/27/heisman.watch/patrick-peterson-is.jpg

OrangeSe7en
01-05-2011, 07:55 PM
http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/2010/writers/cory_mccartney/09/27/heisman.watch/patrick-peterson-is.jpg

Awesome, another Moreno with his stupid dances and poses.

OrangeSe7en
01-05-2011, 07:56 PM
Thanks, much clearer and more convincing the second time.

As long as you understand.

Requiem
01-05-2011, 08:06 PM
http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/patrick-peterson-lsu.jpg

jx028
01-06-2011, 12:28 AM
As long as McDaniels coaching this team , i don't care which target , same roster but a better record , i believe .

LRtagger
01-06-2011, 07:18 AM
Awesome, another Moreno with his stupid dances and poses.

Exactly. How dare any player celebrate a TD. No way we should draft this scrub Moreno wannabe.

http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/patrick-peterson-interception.jpg