PDA

View Full Version : Who should we draft at #2?


Williams
01-14-2011, 07:16 PM
So now that Fairley has officially declared… who do you want? With such strong defensive prospects, we're at a great spot to have our choice of the lot unless Carolina goes D. Fairley has my vote, but I'd be damn happy with any of these guys.

Man-Goblin
01-14-2011, 07:18 PM
Best defensive lineman, whoever that is. No problem with Fairley or Bowers at #2 if that's who they grade the highest.

Garcia Bronco
01-14-2011, 07:21 PM
If you say draft a CB...you lose your balls

Hamrob
01-14-2011, 07:29 PM
1. Trade down and accumulate more picks
2. Any of the above (Fairley, Peterson, Bowers)

Garcia Bronco
01-14-2011, 07:30 PM
1. Trade down and accumulate more picks
2. Any of the above (Fairley, Peterson, Bowers)

We won;t be able to trade out of that second spot and get the value that you want.

bombay
01-14-2011, 07:32 PM
If they stay at 2 and Fairley isn't taken by Carolina, he's the obvious choice. This team needs an interior DL in the worst way. I'd like to see Liugit from Illinois or Heyward from Ohio St as well with a later pick. Also, if Illinois running back Mikael LeShoure is available in the 4th or 5th round, he would be a very good additon.

Man-Goblin
01-14-2011, 07:32 PM
We won;t be able to trade out of that second spot and get the value that you want.

With the new rookie scale in place high picks are going to be worth more than they ever have.

ICON
01-14-2011, 07:51 PM
Patrick Peterson

Homer Simpson
01-14-2011, 07:54 PM
Best defensive lineman, whoever that is. No problem with Fairley or Bowers at #2 if that's who they grade the highest.

:thumbsup:

Homer Simpson
01-14-2011, 07:56 PM
Patrick Peterson

Having an all-pro HOF CB for the last decade has led to one playoff win. Even if Peterson is the equal of Champ (spoiler alert = he won't be) it doesn't help our biggest weakness.
Let's get the D line fixed first for god's sake.

Rohirrim
01-14-2011, 07:58 PM
Hard to tell. If we're going with a 4-3, and we franchise or sign Champ, then Ayers and Dumervil are our DEs and Fairley would be the sensible choice as an interior, one gap rusher. If we don't sign Champ, maybe Peterson, but I would think that Fox will want to fix the Dline first, before investing heavily in the secondary. If we're going with a 3/4 then Dareus is the smart pick, but we still don't have much in the way of a NT or 3/4 LBs, so if it's 3/4, the smart thing to do is trade down and get two linemen, like Paea and Jordan and more picks for LBs. Doesn't really matter because it won't get fixed in one season.

chawknz
01-14-2011, 08:48 PM
Trade down, get picks.

OBF1
01-14-2011, 08:55 PM
Trade down, get picks.

And do what with them??? I have an idea, lets get more of what we already have.... Average, make zero impact players. Great idea. We have been doing that for years and look what it has gotten us.

Do not trade down, do not pass go, do not collect "more picks" Pick the best player in the draft period at each draft slot.

I am so sick of hearing the lets get more picks crap. Who is going to give us equal/fair value to pick at #2 expecially if Fairly is taken #1 by Carolina.

Anyone? Bueller....

chawknz
01-14-2011, 09:09 PM
Anyone who wants a QB, and there's a few.

peacepipe
01-14-2011, 09:17 PM
With the new rookie scale in place high picks are going to be worth more than they ever have.

I hate to break the news to everyone but unless their is a agreement on the CBA there is no rookie pay scale.

Homer Simpson
01-14-2011, 09:18 PM
Fox hit withthe 2 before!

ZONA
01-14-2011, 09:24 PM
1) Fairley
2) Peterson
3) Trade Down

listopencil
01-14-2011, 09:25 PM
I'm leaning towards Fairley, but picked wait and see.

Homer Simpson
01-14-2011, 09:26 PM
1) Fairley
2) Peterson
3) Trade Down

Not a Bowers fan?

Finger Roll
01-14-2011, 10:03 PM
And do what with them??? I have an idea, lets get more of what we already have.... Average, make zero impact players. Great idea. We have been doing that for years and look what it has gotten us.

Do not trade down, do not pass go, do not collect "more picks" Pick the best player in the draft period at each draft slot.

I am so sick of hearing the lets get more picks crap. Who is going to give us equal/fair value to pick at #2 expecially if Fairly is taken #1 by Carolina.

Anyone? Bueller....

I agree 100%. Screw trading down and collecting 2nd and 3rd round picks. I would say 70% of players drafted in round 2 and 3 turn out to be crap anyway. If you don't believe me look at all the last 10 drafts

Finger Roll
01-14-2011, 10:05 PM
I would also choose Fairley but I think Carolina will take him. Next on my list would be Bowers then maybe Robert Quinn

FireFly
01-15-2011, 04:06 AM
Nick Fairley. If he's gone trade down.

I'd rather another 2nd than a CB with the 2nd overall pick.

Ratboy
01-15-2011, 04:21 AM
With us going back to the 4-3, it has to be Fairley if available, if not, Bowers.

strafen
01-15-2011, 07:28 AM
A running back! Ha!

HEAV
01-15-2011, 08:52 AM
Right now Patrick Peterson is the safest pick. Both Fairley and Bowers are in that one year wonder catagory, hell Fairley has the smell of Jarvis Moss. Fairley is coming in with the hype of the BCS Championship game (like Moss back in the day) and he could fall on his face.

To me Fairley is a huge risk with the 2nd overall. He has attitude issues and then the other day I heard McShay say that the kid takes more plays off then you would like. Let's face it the last thing this team needs is a lazy, fat, million dollar bust on the D-line.

Bowers is intriguing as hell. The kid is big and could anchor the DE position for Denver. But the guy has only done it one year and he didn't look good in the bowl game against USF. He looks the part of an NFL player, but we have seen that type look before fail.

Patrick Peterson is the most consistant defensive player worthy of the 2nd overall selection. The guy has done it for 3 years at LSU and always shows up in big meaningful games. With the uncertain CBA and the chance that Champ may move on to another team with better chance to win. Well it makes most sense to draft a player that can fill that void. Plus just look at the secondary as it stands today. Champ FA, Goodmen getting older banged up, Cox waiting for trial...Syd'Quan may never be more than a nickle corner.

Plus a corner like Peterson can have a longer career than a DT or DE.

I understand we are weak up front (have been for years) but to shoot ourselves in the foot to reach on a couple of D-linemen...that would hurt.

So for me it's Patrick Peterson and then work on the DL in round 2.

baja
01-15-2011, 09:03 AM
Right now Patrick Peterson is the safest pick. Both Fairley and Bowers are in that one year wonder catagory, hell Fairley has the smell of Jarvis Moss. Fairley is coming in with the hype of the BCS Championship game (like Moss back in the day) and he could fall on his face.

To me Fairley is a huge risk with the 2nd overall. He has attitude issues and then the other day I heard McShay say that the kid takes more plays off then you would like. Let's face it the last thing this team needs is a lazy, fat, million dollar bust on the D-line.

Bowers is intriguing as hell. The kid is big and could anchor the DE position for Denver. But the guy has only done it one year and he didn't look good in the bowl game against USF. He looks the part of an NFL player, but we have seen that type look before fail.

Patrick Peterson is the most consistant defensive player worthy of the 2nd overall selection. The guy has done it for 3 years at LSU and always shows up in big meaningful games. With the uncertain CBA and the chance that Champ may move on to another team with better chance to win. Well it makes most sense to draft a player that can fill that void. Plus just look at the secondary as it stands today. Champ FA, Goodmen getting older banged up, Cox waiting for trial...Syd'Quan may never be more than a nickle corner.

Plus a corner like Peterson can have a longer career than a DT or DE.

I understand we are weak up front (have been for years) but to shoot ourselves in the foot to reach on a couple of D-linemen...that would hurt.

So for me it's Patrick Peterson and then work on the DL in round 2.

Nice well reasoned post HEAV. I agree with you Peterson at 2 is the best pick of us every thing considered. We can ill afford a bust at 2 and with a one year wonder that risk has to be high.

Rohirrim
01-15-2011, 09:22 AM
I doubt that drafting a CB at #2 will win us a single game next season. Drafting a pass rusher could win us several.

long beach bronco
01-15-2011, 09:39 AM
Trade for Haynesworth and then draft Fairley at #2 and have Doom and Ayers at end, we would have the ultimate power in the universe, then I suggest we use it.

Taco John
01-15-2011, 09:42 AM
I would be thrilled with either Fairley or Peterson. I would rather trade down and stockpile picks than pick Bowers. I would be upset to have Fairley or Peterson on the board and we instead took Bowers.

baja
01-15-2011, 09:44 AM
I doubt that drafting a CB at #2 will win us a single game next season. Drafting a pass rusher could win us several.

But drafting a bust will not lead to one sack. Can we afford a high reward / high risk pick at the 2 spot? We went with the safe choice for a HC which makes sense and it also makes sense to draft a guy that is highly likely to be a blue chip player than one that might be at a position of need.

baja
01-15-2011, 09:46 AM
Trade for Haynesworth and then draft Fairley at #2 and have Doom and Ayers at end, we would have the ultimate power in the universe, then I suggest we use it.

The timing might be good on Haynesworth but he is a very rich man does he still want to play football is the question you need to answer first.

Taco John
01-15-2011, 09:48 AM
Imagine getting Nick Fairley and Stephen Paea in rounds 1 and 2.

baja
01-15-2011, 09:54 AM
I would be thrilled with either Fairley or Peterson. I would rather trade down and stockpile picks than pick Bowers. I would be upset to have Fairley or Peterson on the board and we instead took Bowers.

In this draft trading down is attractive to a few teams question why would it be attractive for a team to trade up.

Dr. Broncenstein
01-15-2011, 09:54 AM
I cannot begin to understand how anyone can look at what Haynesworth did last year and still think he is part of the solution. Any player who is willing to do this has absolutely no pride. None. You want to hitch your wagon to this?

http://www.sportsgrid.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/haynesworth.gif

TheReverend
01-15-2011, 09:55 AM
Imagine getting Nick Fairley and Stephen Paea in rounds 1 and 2.

I got a semi, but I think that would definitely bring a return of the 4-3

TheReverend
01-15-2011, 09:56 AM
Trade for Haynesworth and then draft Fairley at #2 and have Doom and Ayers at end, we would have the ultimate power in the universe, then I suggest we use it.

........then which would you waste their skill set on playing at the 0?

Bigdawg26
01-15-2011, 10:02 AM
Still kinda early right now. I want to wait til after the combine and workouts to see but right now I want farley!

Austin Bronco Fan
01-15-2011, 10:30 AM
Reading the comments and looking at the draft boards, trading down sounds like the best option, should the option present itself. This draft appears deep at the D-line position, so why risk a high pick on Fairley? Additionally, a strong D-line is far more important to the pass defense than a CB. Even the best CB's will give up a few plays in a game if the opposing QB has time to eat lunch and chug a beer before throwing the ball. Get the pressure on, and that QB is more likely to make a mistake. I just don't see how drafting Peterson is more important than beefing up the D-line. Give the QB enough time, and even Peterson would get burned now and then. Getting a Paea later (looks like he could go late first round based on mocks I've seen.) Would go a long way towards clogging up the middle and letting Doom do his thing. Plus we can draft additional linemen with the added picks.

This draft appears heavy on defense. Stockpiling draft picks and getting more players is the best way I can see to take full advantage. Makes even more sense if you factor in the lack of CBA. Should the negotiations take longer (which appears likely) Champ will stay due to lack of FA, player trades will be restricted at best, and the draft will be the main way to bring in new talent.

Mr. Elway
01-15-2011, 10:40 AM
I cannot begin to understand how anyone can look at what Haynesworth did last year and still think he is part of the solution. Any player who is willing to do this has absolutely no pride. None. You want to hitch your wagon to this?

http://www.sportsgrid.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/haynesworth.gif

What you're looking at there is a man with his spirit broken. His best days are behind him. Mike Shanahan is not a man to be messed with.

Rohirrim
01-15-2011, 10:47 AM
But drafting a bust will not lead to one sack. Can we afford a high reward / high risk pick at the 2 spot? We went with the safe choice for a HC which makes sense and it also makes sense to draft a guy that is highly likely to be a blue chip player than one that might be at a position of need.

I think we have very good people in our scouting department who will study every one of these draftees down to the absolute last detail, talking to their coaches, watching all their film, etc. If they come to the decision that the risk among them is relatively equal, then I would go with the position which brings the most immediate impact to the win/loss column, and that is definitely DT over CB.

Mr. Elway
01-15-2011, 10:52 AM
I think we have very good people in our scouting department who will study every one of these draftees down to the absolute last detail, talking to their coaches, watching all their film, etc.

And those people will NOT run out of coffee OR pizza. We have our best man on it.

Agamemnon
01-15-2011, 10:52 AM
I think we have very good people in our scouting department who will study every one of these draftees down to the absolute last detail, talking to their coaches, watching all their film, etc. If they come to the decision that the risk among them is relatively equal, then I would go with the position which brings the most immediate impact to the win/loss column, and that is definitely DT over CB.

CB also won't help our horrendous run defense. I just don't see how Patrick Peterson helps us at all to be honest. And considering the likelihood that we're going to be playing a lot of zone coverages from here on out I just don't see a need for a shutdown corner.

HEAV
01-15-2011, 03:00 PM
I doubt that drafting a CB at #2 will win us a single game next season. Drafting a pass rusher could win us several.

So are we worried about winning now....or about being a winniing franchise in the future?

The day's of Shanahan quick fixes are over. We need to rebuild and start with solid building blocks.

We have DE's and DT that for nopw can hold the spot and are under contract.

But if we lose Champ.... we will need a young corner.

If we do keep Champ and pair him with Peterson. Just think how much Peterson will learn from Champ! It would be just like when the Redskins drafted Champ and had Darrell Green be a mentor to him.

It'd be a win win selection in my eyes.

TheReverend
01-15-2011, 03:05 PM
CB also won't help our horrendous run defense. I just don't see how Patrick Peterson helps us at all to be honest. And considering the likelihood that we're going to be playing a lot of zone coverages from here on out I just don't see a need for a shutdown corner.

Ummm, yes it does.

In the most straight forward view, a corner that can make his reads, and has the size to shed blocks or get off stalk blocks and make the play in the backfield before the back can hit the corner is huge.

Looking deeper, their coverage ability is also a huge boon to run defense. Knowing a corner can take a receiver out of the game let's DC's call more cover 1 and even cover 0 than man under 2 deep or cover 2s, 3s and quarters. This pinches gap responsibilities ALL over the front seven having a safety taking a 7 or 9 gap. This also adds more pass rush, not to mention that covering receivers for a second or two longer gives the DL more time to get to the QB.

When you can get a premier football player, you TAKE a premier football player, regardless of the position.

OrangeSe7en
01-15-2011, 03:08 PM
Fairley or Bowers...if not then trade down and take Akeem Ayers...or maybe Paea.

NFLBRONCO
01-15-2011, 03:21 PM
so are we worried about winning now....or about being a winniing franchise in the future?

The day's of shanahan quick fixes are over. We need to rebuild and start with solid building blocks.

We have de's and dt that for nopw can hold the spot and are under contract.

But if we lose champ.... We will need a young corner.

If we do keep champ and pair him with peterson. Just think how much peterson will learn from champ! It would be just like when the redskins drafted champ and had darrell green be a mentor to him.

It'd be a win win selection in my eyes.

rep

OrangeSe7en
01-15-2011, 03:25 PM
So are we worried about winning now....or about being a winniing franchise in the future?

The day's of Shanahan quick fixes are over. We need to rebuild and start with solid building blocks.
We have DE's and DT that for nopw can hold the spot and are under contract.

But if we lose Champ.... we will need a young corner.

If we do keep Champ and pair him with Peterson. Just think how much Peterson will learn from Champ! It would be just like when the Redskins drafted Champ and had Darrell Green be a mentor to him.

It'd be a win win selection in my eyes.

Sorry but the building blocks are in the front 7.

schaaf
01-15-2011, 03:34 PM
1. Fairley
2. Peterson
3. Bowers

When we select one of these, I will be ordering a jersey off the broncos website while jumping up and down.

baja
01-15-2011, 03:44 PM
I think we have very good people in our scouting department who will study every one of these draftees down to the absolute last detail, talking to their coaches, watching all their film, etc. If they come to the decision that the risk among them is relatively equal, then I would go with the position which brings the most immediate impact to the win/loss column, and that is definitely DT over CB.


Still your looking at one season of work

OrangeSe7en
01-15-2011, 04:00 PM
There's really no argument to be made for Denver taking a CB at #2.

Requiem
01-15-2011, 04:02 PM
But there is the argument for a guy who did absolute **** until this year. Right.

chanesaw
01-15-2011, 04:15 PM
I will be happy with either Peterson or Fairley.

HAT
01-15-2011, 04:24 PM
There's really no argument to be made for Denver taking a CB at #2.

Really noob? Is that why there's a 10 page thread on the subject + multiple other threads?

OrangeSe7en
01-15-2011, 04:25 PM
Really noob? Is that why there's a 10 page thread on the subject + multiple other threads?

Yeah, really.

HEAV
01-15-2011, 04:32 PM
Sorry but the building blocks are in the front 7.

So then draft and linebacker....

If you're talking about front 4 or 3 and want a building block @ DE or DT, but want to take a risk with one year wonders....

It's not like Fairley or Bowers are Ndamukong Suh. Suh performed for 2 years at a high level in college and had zero attitude issues or blips on the radar.

Yes we need to build a front seven. I stated this more than once.

But again I say the options available @ DT and DE come with risks. Those risks may not be worthy of the 2nd overall selection.

Now if you trade down and can still land one of them and gain selections later fine.

But if we are talking about staying at 2 and drafting the best player with the least amount of risk. It's Peterson.

OrangeSe7en
01-15-2011, 04:34 PM
So then draft and linebacker....

If you're talking about front 4 or 3 and want a building block @ DE or DT, but want to take a risk with one year wonders....

It's not like Fairley or Bowers are Ndamukong Suh. Suh performed for 2 years at a high level in college and had zero attitude issues or blips on the radar.

Yes we need to build a front seven. I stated this more than once.

But again I say the options available @ DT and DE come with risks. Those risks may not be worthy of the 2nd overall selection.

Now if you trade down and can still land one of them and gain selections later fine.

But if we are talking about staying at 2 and drafting the best player with the least amount of risk. It's Peterson.

Even if Peterson is low risk, a CBs impact is not worthy of the #2.

Requiem
01-15-2011, 04:41 PM
Sure it is.

HEAV
01-15-2011, 04:53 PM
Even if Peterson is low risk, a CBs impact is not worthy of the #2.

Depends again on what impact you are looking for?

You trying to quick fix and get eight or nine wins one year.

Or are you trying to build a team for the next 5-7 years.

Going to have to replace Champ (if he leaves) with someone. You wanna put your hopes on Perrish Cox beating his wrap? Nate Jones? Syd'quan Thompson?

If the selection is a DE/DT and it turns into a burst and Peterson out performs them...it's a missed chance.

With the NFL passing games you need solid corners and Patrick Peterson has been the best cover corner in college football the last 2 years.

Peterson is worthy of a top five pick.

OrangeSe7en
01-15-2011, 04:57 PM
Depends again on what impact you are looking for?

You trying to quick fix and get eight or nine wins one year.

Or are you trying to build a team for the next 5-7 years.

Going to have to replace Champ (if he leaves) with someone. You wanna put your hopes on Perrish Cox beating his wrap? Nate Jones? Syd'quan Thompson?

If the selection is a DE/DT and it turns into a burst and Peterson out performs them...it's a missed chance.

With the NFL passing games you need solid corners and Patrick Peterson has been the best cover corner in college football the last 2 years.

Peterson is worthy of a top five pick.

You can put any amount of analysis into it you want. But at the end of the day, a CB is not worthy of the #2 pick for Denver.

HEAV
01-15-2011, 05:02 PM
You can put any amount of analysis into it you want. But at the end of the day, a CB is not worthy of the #2 pick for Denver.

Kinda like how much analysis you put in rebuttal against him being worthy....

bombay
01-15-2011, 05:34 PM
Top notch corners are rare, and certainly worth a top pick. The Broncos' most pressing need is defensive tackle, though. I suppose it comes down to whether you're drafting for need, even if you think the best player available is at a different position. Age old argument.

OrangeSe7en
01-15-2011, 05:39 PM
Top notch corners are rare, and certainly worth a top pick. The Broncos' most pressing need is defensive tackle, though. I suppose it comes down to whether you're drafting for need, even if you think the best player available is at a different position. Age old argument.

Except its not really an argument. All one needs to do is look at having Champ Bailey for the past 3 years as an example, and it's pretty much end of discussion.

Rohirrim
01-15-2011, 06:06 PM
Let's spend the next couple of years building the perfect secondary. And then watch them get burned, game after game after game, because we still have no pass rush.

HAT
01-15-2011, 06:39 PM
Let's spend the next couple of years building the perfect secondary. And then watch them get burned, game after game after game, because we still have no pass rush.

You guys do realize that Denver has picks #36 & 46 as well?

I wouldn't want Peterson either if Champ was extended and Cox is cleared but as it is CB IS a position of need.

IMO
1. Peterson + 2a. BPA @ DL + 2b. BPA @ DL/LB is greater than say....

1. Fairley + 2a. BPA @ DL + 2b. BPA @ CB/S

And remember, this isn't a 1 year rebuild anyway. If they get Peterson and even one DL starter in the 2011 2nd round (And Doom coming back), they can target a stud DL or ILB in the first round in 2012. Much better class of ILB's next year anyway.

Requiem
01-15-2011, 06:39 PM
Let's spend the next couple of years building the perfect secondary. And then watch them get burned, game after game after game, because we still have no pass rush.

People advocating for Peterson with our top selection also want to address the defensive line.

Does picking Fairley over Peterson guarantee our defense is going to be better in the long run? Vice versa, no. Here is my theory: Trade down if you can, if not take the best defensive player on board. Accumulate more picks to do other things as well.

There are plenty of defensive lineman in this draft. Hypothetically, say we take Peterson at #2, what is wrong with using our two early seconds on DL?

Here is why Peterson as of right now gets the selection over Fairley for me. I know he is going to come in right away and contribute. He is a starter on our defense. He can even return kicks.

How about Nick? Fairley could be as well, but the learning curve for those players is much different. Especially for a guy who has raw technique and not a whole lot of D-I experience outside this past year and as a rotational man last year. I doubt he has a Suh-like impact as a rookie.

The defense isn't going to immediately change over night. Pending the scheme and what happens, either are worth the selection in all reality.

This has nothing to do with a building from back to front approach or whatnot, it has to do with getting the best defensive player for the Broncos. If Champ does not re-sign here, the argument for Peterson even strengthens.

Draft status certainly deals with how one well plays, but moving forward I am looking for other things that we could help build our team around. I like what Peterson brings to the table immediate and long-term for the Broncos than what Nick Fairley does.

Just my personal belief. Getting a guy like Peterson, 2 DL and another defensive player with our top four selections would have us in good shape for the future.

As long as a good defensive lineman is picked in the first couple of rounds for us, people should be happy. I can see the pros of going for Fairley at #2, but I see a much longer list of cons.

peacepipe
01-15-2011, 06:42 PM
What part of 2 2nd round picks is being forgotten? get peterson with the #2 & get DL in the 2nd round. should be able to get another 2nd in orton trade & also get even more if we trade down no lower than 4 or 5. how many wins did suh get for detroit.

OrangeSe7en
01-15-2011, 06:42 PM
You guys do realize that Denver has picks #36 & 46 as well?

I wouldn't want Peterson either if Champ was extended and Cox is cleared but as it is CB IS a position of need.
IMO
1. Peterson + 2a. BPA @ DL + 2b. BPA @ DL/LB is greater than say....

1. Fairley + 2a. BPA @ DL + 2b. BPA @ CB/S

And remember, this isn't a 1 year rebuild anyway. If they get Peterson and even one DL starter in the 2011 2nd round (And Doom coming back), they can target a stud DL or ILB in the first round in 2012. Much better class of ILB's next year anyway.

No thanks. Thats called insanity. Its also called running in place.

Requiem
01-15-2011, 06:47 PM
What part of 2 2nd round picks is being forgotten? get peterson with the #2 & get DL in the 2nd round. should be able to get another 2nd in orton trade & also get even more if we trade down no lower than 4 or 5. how many wins did suh get for detroit.

Don't you see though?

It is smart to use a #2 overall on a position where immediate impact almost never happens!

enjolras
01-15-2011, 06:53 PM
Look... I still don't get the Petersen argument. The best defensive teams in the playoffs this year are really strong in the middle. Give me a strong pass rusher, an upgrade at linebacker, or (please for the love of god) a safety. Really our biggest position of need, and it's been this way for at least 5 seasons, is at safety. Look at the Ravens (Reed) and the Steelers (Polamalu) for instance. They almost play as another linebacker. They blitz, they tackle well, and they disrupt the middle.

That said, at #2 I'm looking for impact. If Petersen was the ONLY true impact player left, I'd agree. I think Fairley is that player...if it's a choice between Fairley and Petersen give me Fairley. If it's between Petersen and nearly anyone else (except for maybe Bowers, I haven't really seen him play much) then we can talk:)

OrangeSe7en
01-15-2011, 06:56 PM
Look... I still don't get the Petersen argument. The best defensive teams in the playoffs this year are really strong in the middle. Give me a strong pass rusher, an upgrade at linebacker, or (please for the love of god) a safety. Really our biggest position of need, and it's been this way for at least 5 seasons, is at safety. Look at the Ravens (Reed) and the Steelers (Polamalu) for instance. They almost play as another linebacker. They blitz, they tackle well, and they disrupt the middle.

That said, at #2 I'm looking for impact. If Petersen was the ONLY true impact player left, I'd agree. I think Fairley is that player...if it's a choice between Fairley and Petersen give me Fairley. If it's between Petersen and nearly anyone else (except for maybe Bowers, I haven't really seen him play much) then we can talk:)

Bleh, Akeem Ayers will likely be an impact player too. And he's a front 7 player with the ability to pass rush in his repertoire. Unless you're taking a front 7 player at #2, you should trade down and add picks.

baja
01-15-2011, 07:00 PM
Many here are talking about trading down like it's just a matter of picking up the telephone. It isn't.

OrangeSe7en
01-15-2011, 07:02 PM
Many here are talking about trading down like it's just a matter of picking up the telephone. It isn't.

Apparently Patrick Peterson isn't that awesome afterall.

Agamemnon
01-15-2011, 07:05 PM
I'd rather just trade down a couple times, grab JJ Watt, and then use our three 2nd rounders and three 3rd rounders to fill all our other needs. I have a funny feeling Watt is going to be one of the biggest steals of this draft anyway. I won't be surprised if he's a better DT in the NFL than Fairley.

baja
01-15-2011, 07:05 PM
Apparently Patrick Peterson isn't that awesome afterall.

Guess you can add Fairley to that too.

lostknight
01-15-2011, 07:06 PM
I worry about one year wonders, and Fairley qualifies. Takes plays off.

Agamemnon
01-15-2011, 07:06 PM
Many here are talking about trading down like it's just a matter of picking up the telephone. It isn't.

Actually, that is part of the process. There's also some talking involved. ;)

FireFly
01-15-2011, 07:08 PM
Many here are talking about trading down like it's just a matter of picking up the telephone. It isn't.

I agree and I've said it before, I think we'll want to trade down and will struggle to find a partner to do it with. I don't think teams are going to want to give up what is required to move into the #2 spot.

OrangeSe7en
01-15-2011, 07:08 PM
Guess you can add Fairley to that too.

That makes no sense. If Carolina takes Peterson, you take Fairley. If Carolina takes Fairley and Peterson is so awesome, you sit back and wait for people to call you...if he's so awesome.

baja
01-15-2011, 07:09 PM
Actually, that is part of the process. There's also some talking involved. ;)

OK your phone is ringing - Hi coach you want to trade for our shinny #2 pick? Just think you can draft ___________


Fill in the blank.

baja
01-15-2011, 07:12 PM
That makes no sense. If Carolina takes Peterson, you take Fairley. If Carolina takes Fairley and Peterson is so awesome, you sit back and wait for people to call you...if he's so awesome.

So now Peterson is going #1 overall???

Your assuming Fairley & Peterson are going #1 

Your point is nobody wants Peterson at #2 so who do they want when they trade our#2 pick as you suggest?

OrangeSe7en
01-15-2011, 07:14 PM
So now Peterson is going #1 overall???

Your assuming Fairley & Peterson are going #1 

Your point is nobody wants Peterson at #2 so who do they want when they trade our#2 pick as you suggest?

No, youre point was that nobody would want Peterson at #2. Youre the one who said it would be hard to trade down.

Agamemnon
01-15-2011, 07:14 PM
OK your phone is ringing - Hi coach you want to trade for our shinny #2 pick? Just think you can draft ___________


Fill in the blank.

At this point it's impossible to predict. It's very possible though that some team may want a player there and be afraid that Buffalo will take him otherwise. No way to know.

baja
01-15-2011, 07:16 PM
No, youre point was that nobody would want Peterson at #2. Youre the one who said it would be hard to trade down.

Right

so what is your point? That teams are standing in line to trade up for Peterson or Fairley.

Agamemnon
01-15-2011, 07:16 PM
For those advocating Peterson, I'd just like to point out that no corner has ever gone that high. There's a reason for that, and trust me, it's not because other corners haven't been as awesome.

OrangeSe7en
01-15-2011, 07:18 PM
Right

so what is your point? That teams are standing in line to trade up for Peterson or Fairley.

I'm not talking about Fairley. I'm talking about Peterson.

Apparently you're implying that no one would want him because you're suggesting no one would call about trading up to get him.

baja
01-15-2011, 07:19 PM
At this point it's impossible to predict. It's very possible though that some team may want a player there and be afraid that Buffalo will take him otherwise. No way to know.

Buffalo needs a QB. Which QB is so much better than every other top prospect that some team is willing to pay the steep price to move up past the Bills?

Agamemnon
01-15-2011, 07:20 PM
Buffalo needs a QB. Which QB is so much better than every other top prospect that some team is willing to pay the steep price to move up past the Bills?

Like I said, it's impossible to predict at this point. I don't necessarily disagree. We may well end up stuck at #2. There's just no way to know right now.

baja
01-15-2011, 07:21 PM
I'm not talking about Fairley. I'm talking about Peterson.

Apparently you're implying that no one would want him because you're suggesting no one would call about trading up to get him.

Wanting him at you natural pick and paying the steep price to move up to take him are two different issues.

Requiem
01-15-2011, 07:22 PM
Charles Woodson, #4.

Agamemnon
01-15-2011, 07:23 PM
Charles Woodson, #4.

Pretty sure that's the highest ever.

Archer81
01-15-2011, 07:24 PM
Shawn Springs, 3. Seattle.


:Broncos:

OrangeSe7en
01-15-2011, 07:26 PM
Wanting him at you natural pick and paying the steep price to move up to take him are two different issues.

You won't know how steep the price is unless you pick up the phone.

errand
01-15-2011, 07:36 PM
I'd say trade down and accumulate draft picks due to the fact that we have numerous problems that one guy, even a DL of Fairley's caliber can fix.

We not only need a dominant DT that can clog the running lanes and requires a constant double team that frees up Dumervil and whoever else for sacks and tackles, but we also need better LB's and someone to replace Dawkins by next year.

Regardless of what we do, i'm sure we all agree it's gotta be a defensive heavy draft for the Broncos....

baja
01-15-2011, 07:36 PM
You won't know how steep the price is unless you pick up the phone.

I never said they wouldn't try.

bpc
01-15-2011, 08:45 PM
I've loved Fairley since about three weeks into the college season. I'm going to ride this out. A dominant DT in 4-3 is essential to doing anything.

peacepipe
01-15-2011, 08:56 PM
I've loved Fairley since about three weeks into the college season. I'm going to ride this out. A dominant DT in 4-3 is essential to doing anything.

is it official,we're moving to a 4-3.

Agamemnon
01-15-2011, 09:05 PM
is it official,we're moving to a 4-3.

It's not official, but wouldn't you be surprised if we didn't?

peacepipe
01-15-2011, 09:37 PM
It's not official, but wouldn't you be surprised if we didn't?

Nothing would surprise me at this point,but I would like to see us stick with the 3-4.

footstepsfrom#27
01-15-2011, 09:44 PM
We're drafting #2?

primetime714
01-15-2011, 10:48 PM
Nothing would surprise me at this point,but I would like to see us stick with the 3-4.

Really? Why? We have a head coach that has been successful with a 4-3 why would we go away from his strengths. In terms of our current personnel you need a good NT to effectively run the 3-4 and that's something we do not have. DL prospects like Fairley and Bowers who could be our first pick fit better in a 4-3.

I know a lot of people think Doom is better in a 3-4, but actually in 2009 a lot of his sacks came when he lined up in the 3 point stance. A switch back to the 4-3 is probably a positive for Doom.

As far as the rest of our defensive players: Ayers is probably better as a DE in the 4-3. DJ Williams was at his best as a WLB in the 4-3. A lot of the DL won't be back, but if they are it wouldn't hurt to have some size in the middle to hold up against the running game. Jamal Williams is not what he used to be as a NT to put it lightly. Haggan might not be back but has good size for the SLB.

In short our coach knows the 4-3 and our key players all fit the scheme. Let's also remember that our defensive was the worst in the league changing the scheme couldn't hurt.

peacepipe
01-15-2011, 11:05 PM
Really? Why? We have a head coach that has been successful with a 4-3 why would we go away from his strengths. In terms of our current personnel you need a good NT to effectively run the 3-4 and that's something we do not have. DL prospects like Fairley and Bowers who could be our first pick fit better in a 4-3.

I know a lot of people think Doom is better in a 3-4, but actually in 2009 a lot of his sacks came when he lined up in the 3 point stance. A switch back to the 4-3 is probably a positive for Doom.

As far as the rest of our defensive players: Ayers is probably better as a DE in the 4-3. DJ Williams was at his best as a WLB in the 4-3. A lot of the DL won't be back, but if they are it wouldn't hurt to have some size in the middle to hold up against the running game. Jamal Williams is not what he used to be as a NT to put it lightly. Haggan might not be back but has good size for the SLB.

In short our coach knows the 4-3 and our key players all fit the scheme. Let's also remember that our defensive was the worst in the league changing the scheme couldn't hurt.
1. if NT is what is needed then draft one.
2. you want to know what all of the top defenses in the NFL have in common? the 3-4 defense.
3. Fox has a history in both schemes.
4. fox has already stated that the personnel we currently have is structured for a 3-4 not a 4-3.

I'm not opposed to the 4-3, I just feel the 3-4 is better.

pricejj
01-15-2011, 11:16 PM
Nick Fairley will probably go #1...
That being the facts, I thought the Broncos should trade down a little and get Dareus. However, I think trades may be unlikely, plus we may not get our man.

I called Cecil Lammey's show earlier today and asked him what he would do with #2. Cecil brought up a good point. He said, "It's not as much of a reach to get Dareus, as you would think. Robert Ayers was more of a reach when he was drafted."

I asked him who he'd rather take if both Fairley and Dareus are available at #2. He said, he would draft Dareus at #2, and to put him at nose tackle in the 3-4. Dareus reminds him of Casey Hampton (drafted 19th overall) and B.J. Raji (9th overall). He said all the behavioral problems and personal fouls that Fairley would get, would be too detrimental to the Broncos, that Dareus would be a better pick. I agree.

Dom Capers said that B.J. Raji is the MVP of his defense. Two years ago, the Packers were the 9th worst team in the NFL. They are now going to the NFC Championship game, having the 2nd best defense. With Hampton, the Steelers are going to the AFC Championship for the 5th time since he was drafted in 2001.

Pick Dareus at #2.

NFLBRONCO
01-16-2011, 12:16 AM
If Fairley is gone trade down to 5 and take the BPA at that point. I would bet Peterson or Dareus/Bowers would be there.

I think these guys can all be top 5 picks. This does not include the biggest hyped position QB that seems to rise up near draft. I can see 1 and possibly 2climb.


Fairley
Bowers
Peterson
Dareus
AJ Green

OrangeSe7en
01-16-2011, 08:48 AM
1. if NT is what is needed then draft one.
2. you want to know what all of the top defenses in the NFL have in common? the 3-4 defense.
3. Fox has a history in both schemes.
4. fox has already stated that the personnel we currently have is structured for a 3-4 not a 4-3.

I'm not opposed to the 4-3, I just feel the 3-4 is better.

That doesnt mean the 3-4 makes the most sense for Denver.

peacepipe
01-16-2011, 09:10 AM
That doesnt mean the 3-4 makes the most sense for Denver.

we're already structured for the 3-4,don't believe me ask john fox. where is it written that you can't have the 3-4 in denver.

OrangeSe7en
01-16-2011, 09:16 AM
we're already structured for the 3-4,don't believe me ask john fox. where is it written that you can't have the 3-4 in denver.

Are we? Last I checked, we were set up to play the 3-4 really badly.

peacepipe
01-16-2011, 09:38 AM
Are we? Last I checked, we were set up to play the 3-4 really badly. We didn't commit to the 3-4 defense. McD had every opportunity last draft to get us the players. we passed on williams & terrance cody. that would've made a huge differance. along with the fact Dumervil was out for the season hurt as well. Eitherway, I'll take John Foxs' word on what the defense is currently structured for.

elsid13
01-16-2011, 09:45 AM
I'm still leaning toward Peterson and then using 2a pick on Austin out of UNC.

HAT
01-16-2011, 09:52 AM
Nick Fairley will probably go #1...
That being the facts, I thought the Broncos should trade down a little and get Dareus. However, I think trades may be unlikely, plus we may not get our man.

I called Cecil Lammey's show earlier today and asked him what he would do with #2. Cecil brought up a good point. He said, "It's not as much of a reach to get Dareus, as you would think. Robert Ayers was more of a reach when he was drafted."

I asked him who he'd rather take if both Fairley and Dareus are available at #2. He said, he would draft Dareus at #2, and to put him at nose tackle in the 3-4. Dareus reminds him of Casey Hampton (drafted 19th overall) and B.J. Raji (9th overall). He said all the behavioral problems and personal fouls that Fairley would get, would be too detrimental to the Broncos, that Dareus would be a better pick. I agree.

Dom Capers said that B.J. Raji is the MVP of his defense. Two years ago, the Packers were the 9th worst team in the NFL. They are now going to the NFC Championship game, having the 2nd best defense. With Hampton, the Steelers are going to the AFC Championship for the 5th time since he was drafted in 2001.

Pick Dareus at #2.

They're not going to the NFCCG because of their D and certainly not because of Raji. Sure, they are a well balanced team offensively & defensively, but they are where they are because of Aaron Rodgers.

Cito Pelon
01-16-2011, 10:31 AM
It would be great if Denver could actually trade out of the #2 and still pick up one of the premier D players, but that would mean still staying in the top 5, #7 at the outside.

I don't recall a lot of instances where teams are gungho to trade up to #2.

#3 - Buffalo
#4 - CIN
#5 - Arizona
#6 - Cleveland
#7 - SF

Who wants a QB so bad among those that they will try for the #2? Maybe all 5 of them, but bad enough to give up a second/third? There's some decent QB prospects this year, so maybe a lower 1st round team like TENN (#8), WASH (#10), Minny (#12), MIA (#15), JAX (#16) might go crazy and try for the #2 overall if the price is right.

If Denver does that they're into the second tier of DL guys that maybe would be drafted too high at those slots, unless they trade down again to get a Cameron Heyward, JJ Watt, Cameron Jordan, Liuget.

Anyway, it's all crazy speculation at this point, because Kevin Kolb and Orton are maybe available for trades (if trades are even gonna be allowed), Vick is an FA. If any of those QB's change teams to one of these "QB-starved" teams, it will affect the draft order pretty dramatically one would think.

So much depends on if and when a new CBA is in place. Right now stay at #2 and Marcell Dareus might be the best way to go. Seems to be a fit for the 3-4 or the 4-3.

footstepsfrom#27
01-16-2011, 11:08 AM
It would be great if Denver could actually trade out of the #2 and still pick up one of the premier D players, but that would mean still staying in the top 5, #7 at the outside.

I don't recall a lot of instances where teams are gungho to trade up to #2.

#3 - Buffalo
#4 - CIN
#5 - Arizona
#6 - Cleveland
#7 - SF

Who wants a QB so bad among those that they will try for the #2? Maybe all 5 of them, but bad enough to give up a second/third? There's some decent QB prospects this year, so maybe a lower 1st round team like TENN (#8), WASH (#10), Minny (#12), MIA (#15), JAX (#16) might go crazy and try for the #2 overall if the price is right.

If Denver does that they're into the second tier of DL guys that maybe would be drafted too high at those slots, unless they trade down again to get a Cameron Heyward, JJ Watt, Cameron Jordan, Liuget.

Anyway, it's all crazy speculation at this point, because Kevin Kolb and Orton are maybe available for trades (if trades are even gonna be allowed), Vick is an FA. If any of those QB's change teams to one of these "QB-starved" teams, it will affect the draft order pretty dramatically one would think.

So much depends on if and when a new CBA is in place. Right now stay at #2 and Marcell Dareus might be the best way to go. Seems to be a fit for the 3-4 or the 4-3.
I don't think any team out there that's not already in the top 5 thinks they need to move up that high for a QB, but maybe into the top 10. The top 5 seem pretty set unless something unexpected at this point like Cameron Newton rocketing up to the top should disturb the order. On the other hand, why trade out of an almost certain can't miss player to get a player who might? It has to make a lot of sense and I don't kinow how you get that in this draft unless you are only trading down maybe 3 spots. Defensive line help just a small step below the top tier is probably available outside the top 10.

I would target Miami with that #15 pick and offer to solve their QB problems as well as make Brandon Marshall a happier guy by sending them Orton for that pick, plus we'd probably have to kick in a #3. One of the talking heads this morning says Kevin Kolb may command a #1 and if that happens we could probably get that for Orton, but say it does cost a #3 as well. At #15 we'd have a shot at Stephen Paea and I think he is suited to playing either the 3/4 NT or the 4/3 DT spot. He's got superior inside strength and quickness to get upfield. He can probably anchor an NFL 3-4 line at 320 pounds in the middle.

Then you still have two #2's left in which to either add another D-line guy like Jared Crick or maybe get at OT prospect like The CU kid to plug into Harris spot. We could gamble on Dontay Moch or nab another inside D-line by like Austin. Basically, I see no reason they can't get Peterson and fix the D-line also. People are also ignoring a few things on the rush to annoint Fairley, namely that he seems like a candidate to get on some coaches bad side in a variety of ways. Paea seems like a safer pick a bit further back.

OrangeCrush2724
01-16-2011, 12:17 PM
I would target Miami with that #15 pick and offer to solve their QB problems as well as make Brandon Marshall a happier guy by sending them Orton for that pick, plus we'd probably have to kick in a #3.

From all what I have been hearing down here is that Miami will move up to draft a QB. But at the 15th pick, they want to get around the 5-7th pick.

At 15 we can pick up a guy like Paea. Most mocks have him at the 15-25 range. And the stock of a DT always rises when draft times comes near.

Austin Bronco Fan
01-16-2011, 12:21 PM
It would be great if Denver could actually trade out of the #2 and still pick up one of the premier D players, but that would mean still staying in the top 5, #7 at the outside.

I don't recall a lot of instances where teams are gungho to trade up to #2.

#3 - Buffalo
#4 - CIN
#5 - Arizona
#6 - Cleveland
#7 - SF

Who wants a QB so bad among those that they will try for the #2? Maybe all 5 of them, but bad enough to give up a second/third? There's some decent QB prospects this year, so maybe a lower 1st round team like TENN (#8), WASH (#10), Minny (#12), MIA (#15), JAX (#16) might go crazy and try for the #2 overall if the price is right.

If Denver does that they're into the second tier of DL guys that maybe would be drafted too high at those slots, unless they trade down again to get a Cameron Heyward, JJ Watt, Cameron Jordan, Liuget.

Anyway, it's all crazy speculation at this point, because Kevin Kolb and Orton are maybe available for trades (if trades are even gonna be allowed), Vick is an FA. If any of those QB's change teams to one of these "QB-starved" teams, it will affect the draft order pretty dramatically one would think.

So much depends on if and when a new CBA is in place. Right now stay at #2 and Marcell Dareus might be the best way to go. Seems to be a fit for the 3-4 or the 4-3.

This plus Miami's displeasure for Henne may give us an opportunity to trade down. QB's usually creep up the draft board as it draws near, and seeing so many QB hungry teams that high could make them consider the #2 slot.

OrangeSe7en
01-16-2011, 12:25 PM
From all what I have been hearing down here is that Miami will move up to draft a QB. But at the 15th pick, they want to get around the 5-7th pick.

At 15 we can pick up a guy like Paea. Most mocks have him at the 15-25 range. And the stock of a DT always rises when draft times comes near.

It also rises when he does 50 reps at the bench press.

Rohirrim
01-16-2011, 03:39 PM
What I don't understand is, if Sanchez only had one good year in college, why doesn't he suck?

OrangeSe7en
01-16-2011, 04:45 PM
What I don't understand is, if Sanchez only had one good year in college, why doesn't he suck?

...or Barry Sanders. Or, better yet, look at Casey Matthews of Green Bay. He was a total late bloomer and was far less celebrated than the other two LBs for USC.

TheReverend
01-16-2011, 05:52 PM
...or Barry Sanders. Or, better yet, look at Casey Matthews of Green Bay. He was a total late bloomer and was far less celebrated than the other two LBs for USC.

Clay... Casey is the brother

Dedhed
01-16-2011, 05:55 PM
That doesnt mean the 3-4 makes the most sense for Denver.

Because Denver shouldn't aim to be the best?

HEAV
01-16-2011, 05:57 PM
Anyone see the JETS (Two) corners takeout the Pats passing attack and force coverage sacks on Brady...

Dedhed
01-16-2011, 06:01 PM
Anyone see the JETS (Two) corners takeout the Pats passing attack and force coverage sacks on Brady...

I've been talking about it all night in the game thread. People who still want to argue that CBs don't have value in today's NFL either didn't watch that game or don't have eyes.

That performance was only possible with great corners.

HEAV
01-16-2011, 06:04 PM
What I don't understand is, if Sanchez only had one good year in college, why doesn't he suck?

Did you see him play last week? Did you see some of his throws today?

Not saying he sucks. But he hasn't been perfect. He's had a solid defense to protect him by keeping games close and look at the talent the Jets have surrounded him with!

Two solid RB's, a top level O-Line protecting him, two #1 wideouts, not to mention a pro bowl TE.

Sanchez misses throws and is still learning he just fell into the right spot with the Jets and his reaping the rewards of not having to carry the entire team.

But again we can look back throughout NFL draft history and see many QB's bust.

HEAV
01-16-2011, 06:21 PM
I've been talking about it all night in the game thread. People who still want to argue that CBs don't have value in today's NFL either didn't watch that game or don't have eyes.

That performance was only possible with great corners.

My point remains the same.

THis isn't a team that will be playing for the AFC Championship next year. So it needs to think about 2-3 years down the line. With the age of our starting secondary and the way the NFL passing game is at it's highest levels ever... I mean we have teams using three or four wideouts set on every play.

You have to have the corners to handle that. If we lose Champ and if Cox goes to prison. Whom do we have at cornerback? Goodman, Thompson, Nate Jones....Cassius Vaughn.

At least at DT we have Jamal Williams, Justin Bannan, Kevin Vickerson, Marcus Thomas (restricted).

We are going to be forced to play Doom and Ayers as DE's (in a 4-3) Williams and Bann are starters at DT with rotation on Vickerson and Thomas.

We can add a free agent or a 2nd round selcetion to that group at DT. Drafting a DE would force Doom or Ayers out.

Drafting Peterson makes the most sense for the future of this team.

OrangeSe7en
01-16-2011, 06:21 PM
Because Denver shouldn't aim to be the best?

This response makes no sense, which isn't surprising.

Dedhed
01-16-2011, 06:25 PM
My point remains the same.

THis isn't a team that will be playing for the AFC Championship next year. So it needs to think about 2-3 years down the line. With the age of our starting secondary and the way the NFL passing game is at it's highest levels ever... I mean we have teams using three or four wideouts set on every play.

You have to have the corners to handle that. If we lose Champ and if Cox goes to prison. Whom do we have at cornerback? Goodman, Thompson, Nate Jones....Cassius Vaughn.

At least at DT we have Jamal Williams, Justin Bannan, Kevin Vickerson, Marcus Thomas (restricted).

We are going to be forced to play Doom and Ayers as DE's (in a 4-3) Williams and Bann are starters at DT with rotation on Vickerson and Thomas.

We can add a free agent or a 2nd round selcetion to that group at DT. Drafting a DE would force Doom or Ayers out.

Drafting Peterson makes the most sense for the future of this team.
I agree completely.

Dedhed
01-16-2011, 06:33 PM
This response makes no sense, which isn't surprising.It isn't surprising that it doesn't make sense to you because you are more dense than a shot put.

Follow the bouncing ball please. If you can't follow general discourse, please just stop posting.

The poster you replied to said that the best defenses in the NFL play the 3-4; which is true.

To which you responded "That doesnt mean the 3-4 makes the most sense for Denver".

If you could read AT ALL, my post makes perfect sense. I'm getting tired of having to spell things out for you in crayon.

Houshyamama
01-16-2011, 06:38 PM
Peterson is a shiny toy and is useless without a good Dline.

I'm tired of seeing a ****ty Dline in Denver, draft Fairley.

footstepsfrom#27
01-16-2011, 06:45 PM
My point remains the same.

THis isn't a team that will be playing for the AFC Championship next year. So it needs to think about 2-3 years down the line. With the age of our starting secondary and the way the NFL passing game is at it's highest levels ever... I mean we have teams using three or four wideouts set on every play.

You have to have the corners to handle that. If we lose Champ and if Cox goes to prison. Whom do we have at cornerback? Goodman, Thompson, Nate Jones....Cassius Vaughn.

At least at DT we have Jamal Williams, Justin Bannan, Kevin Vickerson, Marcus Thomas (restricted).

We are going to be forced to play Doom and Ayers as DE's (in a 4-3) Williams and Bann are starters at DT with rotation on Vickerson and Thomas.

We can add a free agent or a 2nd round selcetion to that group at DT. Drafting a DE would force Doom or Ayers out.

Drafting Peterson makes the most sense for the future of this team.
Have you noticed that over the last couple decades every position on the field has gotten bigger except one; cornerback. The Steelers of the 1970's were the size of many high school teams today. But corners have remained the same size. With the spread of these huge receivers though, it's not going to be long before team's start seeking bigger and bigger corners. I see Peterson as the first of a new wave of cornerbacks who will do more than cover receivers and make an occasional tackle in the run game. Much like Atwater used to crowd the line of scrimmage to stop the running game, a corner the size of Peterson with that kind of speed and playmaking ability should be used in more than one role.

It's difficult but not impossible to find the skill set out ther that guys like Fairley have, and you can often find it in the 2nd round, like Kris Jenkins for example. But finding an athlete to play corner with this kind of size, speed and game breaking abiity is virtually impossible once you get outside the top of the draft. Peterson's talent is more rare, and people are selling him and the position short by dismissing the idea of taking a corner. Today a good defense should have at least 4 corners that can play and play well.

The Moops
01-16-2011, 06:53 PM
I don't think you can go wrong with Bowers or Fairley. Two guys who can put pressure on the QB. That's the name of the game. Denver should be able to find some solid corners, LBs with their 2 picks in the 2nd round.

Of course, trading down in the 1st while keeping a Top 15 pick would be nice too.

DefensiveBehavior
01-19-2011, 01:05 AM
Fairley,Bowers,Dareus????

Yes, Dline is a need,but these guys have proven nothing!!!!!

draft peterson,who is a freak athlete,can lock down Bowe,V Jackson, The #1 wr for oak at the moment,and any other WR in the league...not to mention win the field position battle on special teams...HE IS A STUD!!!!

The draft is a crap shoot,and taking one of these Dlinemen is rediculous,maybe 1 of these 1 year wonders has a steller career..but which one????

Peterson is a sure thing!!!!!!!!

Get Dline in 2nd round...

My Opinions are like Jockstrap Sweat
01-19-2011, 01:18 AM
Fairley,Bowers,Dareus????

Yes, Dline is a need,but these guys have proven nothing!!!!!

draft peterson,who is a freak athlete,can lock down Bowe,V Jackson, The #1 wr for oak at the moment,and any other WR in the league...not to mention win the field position battle on special teams...HE IS A STUD!!!!

The draft is a crap shoot,and taking one of these Dlinemen is rediculous,maybe 1 of these 1 year wonders has a steller career..but which one????

Peterson is a sure thing!!!!!!!!

Get Dline in 2nd round...

I'd like to agree with this. I would love to see peterson lock down the premier TE's and bigger WR's in the league while champ does his

HEAV
01-19-2011, 01:30 AM
Bailey + Peterson = Coverage sack.

DefensiveBehavior
01-19-2011, 01:33 AM
bailey + peterson = coverage sack.

amen!

Borks147
01-19-2011, 01:49 AM
Bailey + Peterson = Coverage sack.

or run the ball down the gut because you can't stop it
or throw a screen because your LBs suck
or use your TE because your safety sucks

The possibilities are endless! Look, I agree that Peterson is a rare talent, and I wouldn't be upset if the Broncos take him. But the next 3 picks better be in the trenches.

I think if we had taken another, flashier, coach then Peterson would've been the obvious choice. But with Fox, I think he understand the importance of building from the trenches a lot more clearly.

Anyways, that is my current opinion, one which I am sure will be repeated ad nauseum for the next few months by like-minded people....

ol#7
01-19-2011, 03:01 AM
Its the D-Line that is in the worst shape followed closely by the LB core. Our secondary is actually the strength of the defense! Remember how there wasnt room on the roster for Alphonso Smith?

Did the Jets lock down the pats? Sure. But they were also able to get to and rough up Brady. Denver cant get to anyone.

peacepipe
01-19-2011, 03:38 AM
Its the D-Line that is in the worst shape followed closely by the LB core. Our secondary is actually the strength of the defense! Remember how there wasnt room on the roster for Alphonso Smith?
Did the Jets lock down the pats? Sure. But they were also able to get to and rough up Brady. Denver cant get to anyone.

LOL, Alponso smith got traded cause McD gave up too early on him. it had nothing to do withy depth or should I say lack of depth. The jets got to brady becuase they locked the recievers down. I could've got to brady with the amount of time that the Jets DBs were giving that front line. brady was sitting back there with time to cook dinner but couldn't get rid of the ball because of the DBs.

peacepipe
01-19-2011, 03:41 AM
or run the ball down the gut because you can't stop it
or throw a screen because your LBs suck
or use your TE because your safety sucks

The possibilities are endless! Look, I agree that Peterson is a rare talent, and I wouldn't be upset if the Broncos take him. But the next 3 picks better be in the trenches.

I think if we had taken another, flashier, coach then Peterson would've been the obvious choice. But with Fox, I think he understand the importance of building from the trenches a lot more clearly.

Anyways, that is my current opinion, one which I am sure will be repeated ad nauseum for the next few months by like-minded people....I bet brady was thinking the same thing, "why didn't I throw to the TE?"

ol#7
01-19-2011, 04:04 AM
I bet brady was thinking the same thing, "why didn't I throw to the TE?"

He did. Gronkowski made some nice plays. Sorry but the pressure early really got into Brady's head. The only int the Jets had came from a linebacker. Add in the fact that they couldnt run that well, the Jets line dominated the game.

I also disagree that A. Smith wasnt a casualty of having too many promising young corners. Read it anyway you want, but unless depth isnt a concern you dont give up on a guy that soon.

mustangtoby
01-19-2011, 05:24 AM
Don't forget, Ron Rivera is a D minded guy, and he's got he 1st pick. I'm betting he goes w/ a defensive pick first, leaving us the 2nd best defensive player.

mhgaffney
01-19-2011, 05:54 AM
The answer is to take the best defensive player -- at whatever position.

Simple, eh?

HEAV
01-19-2011, 11:06 AM
Its the D-Line that is in the worst shape followed closely by the LB core. Our secondary is actually the strength of the defense! Remember how there wasnt room on the roster for Alphonso Smith?

Did the Jets lock down the pats? Sure. But they were also able to get to and rough up Brady. Denver cant get to anyone.

Ya look at the roster again. Imagine it without Champ Bailey (free agent) and with Cox in jail (rape).

Pete51
01-19-2011, 11:25 AM
:thumbs:Right now Patrick Peterson is the safest pick. Both Fairley and Bowers are in that one year wonder catagory, hell Fairley has the smell of Jarvis Moss. Fairley is coming in with the hype of the BCS Championship game (like Moss back in the day) and he could fall on his face.

To me Fairley is a huge risk with the 2nd overall. He has attitude issues and then the other day I heard McShay say that the kid takes more plays off then you would like. Let's face it the last thing this team needs is a lazy, fat, million dollar bust on the D-line.

Bowers is intriguing as hell. The kid is big and could anchor the DE position for Denver. But the guy has only done it one year and he didn't look good in the bowl game against USF. He looks the part of an NFL player, but we have seen that type look before fail.

Patrick Peterson is the most consistant defensive player worthy of the 2nd overall selection. The guy has done it for 3 years at LSU and always shows up in big meaningful games. With the uncertain CBA and the chance that Champ may move on to another team with better chance to win. Well it makes most sense to draft a player that can fill that void. Plus just look at the secondary as it stands today. Champ FA, Goodmen getting older banged up, Cox waiting for trial...Syd'Quan may never be more than a nickle corner.

Plus a corner like Peterson can have a longer career than a DT or DE.

I understand we are weak up front (have been for years) but to shoot ourselves in the foot to reach on a couple of D-linemen...that would hurt.

So for me it's Patrick Peterson and then work on the DL in round 2.

Rohirrim
01-19-2011, 12:03 PM
Fairley,Bowers,Dareus????

Yes, Dline is a need,but these guys have proven nothing!!!!!

draft peterson,who is a freak athlete,can lock down Bowe,V Jackson, The #1 wr for oak at the moment,and any other WR in the league...not to mention win the field position battle on special teams...HE IS A STUD!!!!

The draft is a crap shoot,and taking one of these Dlinemen is rediculous,maybe 1 of these 1 year wonders has a steller career..but which one????

Peterson is a sure thing!!!!!!!!

Get Dline in 2nd round...

There's no such thing as a sure thing.

Requiem
01-19-2011, 12:07 PM
Yes there is.

srphoenix
01-20-2011, 07:16 PM
so question for everyone, if we go with Bowers at #2 does Ayers have a natural spot anywhere else on the defense? Could he play DT or possibly even SAM? or would that relinquish him to filling in occasionally behind Dumervil and Bowers?

I'm not arguing in favor of any of the three at the moment, but Bowers and Dumervil would be a fun set of defensive ends to watch, would definitely help our pass rush.

strafen
01-20-2011, 07:33 PM
Fairley,Bowers,Dareus????

Yes, Dline is a need,but these guys have proven nothing!!!!!

draft peterson,who is a freak athlete,can lock down Bowe,V Jackson, The #1 wr for oak at the moment,and any other WR in the league...not to mention win the field position battle on special teams...HE IS A STUD!!!!

The draft is a crap shoot,and taking one of these Dlinemen is rediculous,maybe 1 of these 1 year wonders has a steller career..but which one????

Peterson is a sure thing!!!!!!!!

Get Dline in 2nd round...Funny you said that. Both ESPN and Foxsports have us picking Peterson with our 1st pick...

baja
01-20-2011, 07:40 PM
What mKes you think Carolina won't take Peterson??

Cleo McDowell
01-21-2011, 07:02 AM
What mKes you think Carolina won't take Peterson??

he is automatically ineligible to go #1 because no cb has ever been drafted there. we decide by default.

DrFate
01-21-2011, 07:07 AM
It would set this franchise back another 3 years if they blow this pick.

Truth be told, I'm not sure I like any of the options.

Fairley is a one-year wonder and is of great character concern.
I'm not a big fan of drafting cornerbacks that high, regardless
Does Bowers fit the 4-3? (likely what Denver will run moving forward under Fox)

If it's one of the above 3, I'd say take Peterson as the lowest-risk

Just trade back and save us all the headache :angel:

peacepipe
01-21-2011, 07:51 AM
he is automatically ineligible to go #1 because no cb has ever been drafted there. we decide by default.that used to be said about DL until one got drafted #1.

jhns
01-21-2011, 07:56 AM
I voted any of the above because I just want to see a top defensive player drafted. I probably should have voted too early, ask me after the combine. I haven't studied these guys enough to have a favorite yet.

MABroncoFan
01-21-2011, 08:39 AM
I'd say Fairley, Bowers, or trade down. Only thing w/ Bowers is, assuming we go to the 4-3, Dumervil is one starter at DE and Ayers hopefully lives up to his #1 pick status on the other side. DT is more of a need area, so if Fairley is gone I'd say trade down a couple of spots if they can to pick up a 2nd and maybe a 3rd rounder, and then take someone like Dareus.

SoDak Bronco
01-21-2011, 09:04 AM
Tobad we don't have Suh in this draft, or even McCoy from Okla. I like them both more then Fairely. I'd really like to take Marcel Darius but not at#2, hope we can trade down to 4-5 and grab him.

Drunken.Broncoholic2
02-21-2014, 02:29 PM
Bump.

These early polls are funny. Lots of Peterson and fairley love. No mention of Von

Drunken.Broncoholic2
02-21-2014, 02:31 PM
I'd rather just trade down a couple times, grab JJ Watt, and then use our three 2nd rounders and three 3rd rounders to fill all our other needs. I have a funny feeling Watt is going to be one of the biggest steals of this draft anyway. I won't be surprised if he's a better DT in the NFL than Fairley.

Aga with the home run.

Powderaddict
02-21-2014, 03:33 PM
I voted "None of the above", I think we should draft that Von Miller kid.

Drunken.Broncoholic2
02-21-2014, 04:14 PM
I voted "None of the above", I think we should draft that Von Miller kid.

0.51%


Awesome

Rohirrim
02-21-2014, 04:28 PM
Funny to think of now. If we had Nick Fairley this last season he had 15 games, 35 tackles and 6 sacks from the DT position.

Von had 5 games, 27 tackles and 5 sacks. Of course, Von is on the 6 to 9 month recovery list and is one infraction away from taking a year off.

Ya just never know.

ZONA
02-21-2014, 04:33 PM
If could do over again, I would stick with Miller ONLY if he can get his act together off the field. Right now it's looking like Peterson was the best all around player and safest pick. Top 5 CB, returns punts/kicks. No off the field problems. He's got great value.

Arkie
02-21-2014, 04:44 PM
Patrick Peterson, JJ Watt, Richard Sherman, AJ Green

Rohirrim
02-21-2014, 04:49 PM
Patrick Peterson, JJ Watt, Richard Sherman, AJ Green

That would not have been too shabby.

Requiem
02-21-2014, 04:51 PM
I was trying to remember if it was Bowers or Adams who was the Clemson dude who died. It was Adams.

Hamrob
02-22-2014, 10:12 AM
I thought we should have traded down and picked up more picks. There were some great players in that draft. Von has given us one great season out of 3 and is a huge question mark going forward.

I think Von was a good/safe pick...but, obviously a risk. Dareus or Peterson were probably the safe picks at #2. But if we could have traded back...picked 2 great players...I'm always for that.

Hamrob
02-22-2014, 10:13 AM
In fact...I would consider trading out of the #31 pick too. trade back and pick up a 3.

Smilin Assassin
02-22-2014, 10:29 AM
Still happy with the pick.

Von had HOF potential and has shown it at the NFL level. Obviously I want him to stay clean off the field, but still happy with this pick.

Love it, actually.

Johnykbr
02-22-2014, 11:14 AM
I thought we should have traded down and picked up more picks. There were some great players in that draft. Von has given us one great season out of 3 and is a huge question mark going forward.

I think Von was a good/safe pick...but, obviously a risk. Dareus or Peterson were probably the safe picks at #2. But if we could have traded back...picked 2 great players...I'm always for that.

Von's first season was still pretty darn great as well. I don't know why people are writing it off.

DENVERDUI55
02-22-2014, 12:34 PM
JJ Watt in the first Sherman in the 5th.

NFLBRONCO
02-22-2014, 12:59 PM
As of today Peterson/Watt would be best picks at 2. Von should be as well (talent alone) but, due to his off the field brains. Him getting banned again would not surprise me at all. We'll see in a few years how it turns out.

Arkie
02-24-2014, 04:15 PM
That would not have been too shabby.

Those are the players with better career values at pro-football-reference.

It was a good draft for the Broncos. Julius Thomas will move up to a first round grade after another year or two like last year. Rahim Moore gets a true 2nd round grade.


Cam Newton
Patrick Peterson
J.J. Watt
Richard Sherman (5th)
Andy Dalton (2nd)
A.J. Green
Von Miller
Muhammad Wilkerson
Tyron Smith
Nate Solder
Julio Jones
Cameron Jordan
DeMarco Murray (3rd)
Jurrell Casey (3rd)
Robert Quinn
Colin Kaepernick (2nd)
Torrey Smith (2nd)
K.J. Wright (4th)
Marcell Dareus
Aldon Smith
Mike Pouncey
Ryan Kerrigan
Jabaal Sheard (2nd)
Orlando Franklin (2nd)
Justin Houston (3rd)
Christian Ponder
Randall Cobb (2nd)
Corey Liuget
Anthony Castonzo
Akeem Ayers (2nd)
Brooks Reed (2nd)
Stefen Wisniewski (2nd)


49. Rahim Moore (2nd)
80. Julius Thomas (4th)

gunns
02-24-2014, 04:17 PM
I'm thrilled we took Von, although at the time didn't know much about him. Hindsight. If we hadn't taken Von I wish we had taken Robert Quinn.

TheReverend
02-24-2014, 04:44 PM
JJ Watt in the first Sherman in the 5th.

Peterson in the first, Sherman in the fifth, blitz everyone else.

Mediator12
02-25-2014, 08:36 AM
Those are the players with better career values at pro-football-reference.

It was a good draft for the Broncos. Julius Thomas will move up to a first round grade after another year or two like last year. Rahim Moore gets a true 2nd round grade.


Cam Newton
Patrick Peterson
J.J. Watt
Richard Sherman (5th)
Andy Dalton (2nd)
A.J. Green
Von Miller
Muhammad Wilkerson
Tyron Smith
Nate Solder
Julio Jones
Cameron Jordan
DeMarco Murray (3rd)
Jurrell Casey (3rd)
Robert Quinn
Colin Kaepernick (2nd)
Torrey Smith (2nd)
K.J. Wright (4th)
Marcell Dareus
Aldon Smith
Mike Pouncey
Ryan Kerrigan
Jabaal Sheard (2nd)
Orlando Franklin (2nd)
Justin Houston (3rd)
Christian Ponder
Randall Cobb (2nd)
Corey Liuget
Anthony Castonzo
Akeem Ayers (2nd)
Brooks Reed (2nd)
Stefen Wisniewski (2nd)


49. Rahim Moore (2nd)
80. Julius Thomas (4th)

That list is full of it! Aldon Smith and Marcel Dareus that far behind Andy Dalton ???

Mediator12
02-25-2014, 08:37 AM
Peterson in the first, Sherman in the fifth, blitz everyone else.

That would be so fun! Cover Zero all day Long bitches!

TheReverend
02-25-2014, 11:15 AM
That would be so fun! Cover Zero all day Long b****es!

How many weeks before teams just start sitting their starting QB when they play Denver?

Answer: One less than when Goodell steps in and puts a stop to it Ha!