PDA

View Full Version : Von Miller new Broncos Target...supposedly


tsiguy96
03-31-2011, 05:24 PM
And we enter the BS phase of the draft.

Von Miller as apparently the new broncos target. I would not be disappointed.
per roto, per klis:
Klis opined last weekend that a trade was unlikely. It still may be, but it appears that he's come upon new information. If John Elway can't trade down, Klis says the plan is to take Texas A&M OLB Von Miller. Just keep in mind that we're entering the period of disinformation leading up to the draft.

Doggcow
03-31-2011, 05:39 PM
Eh, could be worse.

I feel like any of the 3 will be solid contributors for a decade. Not like we're looking at a Jamarcus Russell here.

razorwire77
03-31-2011, 05:42 PM
I'd be OK with this only in a trade down scenario.

elsid13
03-31-2011, 05:46 PM
Why? It doesn't make sense he doesn't fit the profile of the LBs Fox has gone after.

Lestat
03-31-2011, 06:00 PM
well, you have to draft the player you believe is right. but man i hope we can trade down to get him or Peterson if they're the pick. #2 is too high for certain players even if they're the target.

rugbythug
03-31-2011, 06:02 PM
Why? It doesn't make sense he doesn't fit the profile of the LBs Fox has gone after.

He's Fast. That seems to be Fox's MO. Just because he doesn't have to be little to do it should not count against him.

rugbythug
03-31-2011, 06:03 PM
well, you have to draft the player you believe is right. but man i hope we can trade down to get him or Peterson if they're the pick. #2 is too high for certain players even if they're the target.

IMO- Of all the Prospects he is the biggest lock for Top 5.

Jay3
03-31-2011, 06:12 PM
I think the Broncos really can't go wrong in this draft if they pick a defensive player --

Peterson, Miller, Fairely, Dareus, Bowers -- all will be impact.

meangene
03-31-2011, 06:19 PM
I think the Broncos really can't go wrong in this draft if they pick a defensive player --

Peterson, Miller, Fairely, Dareus, Bowers -- all will be impact.

That's kind of where I am at - I have my favorites on the list but I would not be unhappy with any of them. As long as the QB b.s. remains just that!

FireFly
03-31-2011, 06:23 PM
I don't think anyone knows anything outside of the Broncos brass themselves.

The only safe bet is that we won't be drafting a QB.

I agree with Klis that we won't be trading down, there just isn't enough to tempt anyone to move up.

I have preferences before Miller, but I wouldn't be too upset.

Chris
03-31-2011, 06:24 PM
That's kind of where I am at - I have my favorites on the list but I would not be unhappy with any of them. As long as the QB b.s. remains just that!

Which is why it makes sense to me to trade down to 5.

PRBronco
03-31-2011, 06:36 PM
Meh, it's from the DP. But seriously, when was the last time a 4-3 defense turned its self around by investing in a SAM linebacker? Fix the ****ing line.

serious hops
03-31-2011, 06:45 PM
Screw that noise, Dareus FTW. I think Elway knows WTF he's doing.

Smilin Assassin
03-31-2011, 06:47 PM
The difference between Klis' opinion and anyone on the Orangemane's?

....he gets his published.

That said, I like Miller alot....would just rather Dareus at #2.

crush17
03-31-2011, 06:54 PM
If we don't trade down, the pick has to be Dareus. I will say it over and over again.

LetsGoBroncos
03-31-2011, 07:12 PM
If we don't trade down, the pick has to be Dareus. I will say it over and over again.

Bingo

Chris
03-31-2011, 07:14 PM
If we don't trade down, the pick has to be Dareus. I will say it over and over again.

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/7duP4d9ZziY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

BMarsh615
03-31-2011, 07:33 PM
I would be happy with Miller only if we trade to number 5 and both Dareus and Fairley were gone. Not that I don't like Miller as a player, but I just see a HUGE hole at the DT spot and both Dareus and Fairley are worthy of the #2 pick.

Ray Finkle
03-31-2011, 07:38 PM
I'd kick myself in the face....

lostknight
03-31-2011, 07:40 PM
I like Miller. When you think about how much talent we are pushing from the linebackers to the d-line, adding some talent up the middle would be a good idea. Lord knows we need help at Safety and DT as well.

But middle of the field help - tight ends, tackles, linebackers and safeties are the order of the day.

bronco militia
03-31-2011, 07:53 PM
there's nothing new about this rumor

teknic
03-31-2011, 11:14 PM
This is the guy I want in blue and orange, but I'd rather trade down to 5 to grab him. If he's taken by pick 5, I'm fine with Dareus or Peterson.

Taco John
04-01-2011, 12:52 AM
why can't we ever just go out and get the best DT in the draft?

epicSocialism4tw
04-01-2011, 01:04 AM
why can't we ever just go out and get the best DT in the draft?

At this point, I would think that Dareus goes #1.

meangene
04-01-2011, 02:32 AM
Which is why it makes sense to me to trade down to 5.

Agreed, if we can find a trade partner between 3 and 5. Guess that depends on how much teams like Gabbert or Newton. I don't think it becomes a real possibility unless Carolina grabs Newton IMO.

jsco70
04-01-2011, 05:32 AM
why can't we ever just go out and get the best DT in the draft?

I agree 100%. I want them to take the best DL prospect.

However, I think it boils down to the fact Denver needs a complete overhaul on defense. The exceptions are Champ and Dumervil. It's going to take at least a couple of years to get the D to a championship level. Therefore, I believe Denver will trade down, stockpile some extra picks, and add the best player available. This leads me to believe it will be Miller or Peterson, and DL will be addressed later in the draft and in free agency.

Any of the resident college football experts know how the DL class will be in 2012?

montrose
04-01-2011, 06:18 AM
I doubt they've already made their decision. Not to say I couldn't see it being Miller, I could. Just don't think they've made their mind up yet.

worm
04-01-2011, 06:22 AM
Its hard for me to imagine a scenario where Denver doesn't go with the BPA, regardless of position.

Requiem
04-01-2011, 06:27 AM
Any of the resident college football experts know how the DL class will be in 2012?

Not good. Not even close to being as great as this one, which is the best in years.

If the Broncos don't take Dareus (best DT prospect) or trade down and acquire one of the better DL in this draft, they are losers through and through. (I'm still fine with Peterson, though.)

You don't pass on great talent in a phenomenal year at the position. If we wait until 2012 to get DL, we just lost out big time, especially when there are 10+ guys who have Top 50 grades.

footstepsfrom#27
04-01-2011, 06:45 AM
Not good. Not even close to being as great as this one, which is the best in years.

If the Broncos don't take Dareus (best DT prospect) or trade down and acquire one of the better DL in this draft, they are losers through and through. (I'm still fine with Peterson, though.)

You don't pass on great talent in a phenomenal year at the position. If we wait until 2012 to get DL, we just lost out big time, especially when there are 10+ guys who have Top 50 grades.
One of the more frustrating aspects of Shanahan's regime was watching him year after year after year, ignore the strong suit of the draft and draft elsewhere. I recall over and over, wondering why he chose to wait till deep in the draft to pick players at positions that were highly rated near the first round, but that's what he did. If they take Peterson or Miller or anyone else other than a D-lineman, they need to make it the focus from there on out by going heavily for D-line with what they have in the 2nd round, or they can trade back up for players they like in the first. If they don't come out of this draft with at least two defensive line starters, they've squandered a huge opportunity. They can rebuild the D-line in one draft or they can use two, but this draft must have a heavy concentration of beef in the d-line in the top two rounds or we are headed down the same well worn road to ineptitude through draft mistakes once again.

jhns
04-01-2011, 06:59 AM
Any of the resident college football experts know how the DL class will be in 2012?

There is no way to know. Half of this years top DL prospects were not as highly regarded before this past college season. It will all depend on how guys perform this year.

Requiem
04-01-2011, 07:11 AM
There is no way to know. Half of this years top DL prospects were not as highly regarded before this past college season. It will all depend on how guys perform this year.

Not true at all. People knew this was going to be a great class based on the players in it. There are really only a few surprises being talked of as early selections that weren't given last year, i.e. -- one year wonder Nick Fairley.

jhns
04-01-2011, 07:25 AM
Not true at all. People knew this was going to be a great class based on the players in it. There are really only a few surprises being talked of as early selections that weren't given last year, i.e. -- one year wonder Nick Fairley.

Isn't that also true of Bowers? Two of the top three DL prospects...

Edit: I just looked at top prospect lists from a year ago. People thought it was a good d line draft, they just didn't have any of the players right. Fairley, Bowers, and Dareus weren't even in the top 32. They had a few d linemen going 1-15 that aren't even considered second rounders now.

ND Bronco Fan
04-01-2011, 07:44 AM
I dont really like Miller at 2 but if you weigh the option of taking a LB at 2 and taking a good DL in the second you could upgrade two positions of need....

versus taking a great DL at 2 and then maybe less quality in the second round. Thats the only way this makes sense with the depth at DL in this draft.

TheChamp24
04-01-2011, 08:04 AM
For those saying Peterson would be a terrible pick because it isn't drafting of need, I feel the same with Miller. You want to take a SAM LB #2 overall? Ugh...

HooptyHoops
04-01-2011, 08:38 AM
Isn't that also true of Bowers? Two of the top three DL prospects...

Edit: I just looked at top prospect lists from a year ago. People thought it was a good d line draft, they just didn't have any of the players right. Fairley, Bowers, and Dareus weren't even in the top 32. They had a few d linemen going 1-15 that aren't even considered second rounders now.

Where did you find the info on opinions on the 2011 draft class from 2010?

jhns
04-01-2011, 09:11 AM
Where did you find the info on opinions on the 2011 draft class from 2010?

Started here: http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=91390

Then google.

Taco John
04-01-2011, 09:29 AM
I want Fairley or Dareus. Anything else will disappoint me.

CEH
04-01-2011, 09:41 AM
For those saying Peterson would be a terrible pick because it isn't drafting of need, I feel the same with Miller. You want to take a SAM LB #2 overall? Ugh...

I had heard from Alfred Williams and Stink the SAM LB in a John Fox defense is used as a pass rusher. This guy is a 3 down LBer with pass rush skills
He is not coming out of the game on 3rd down

I still think Bowers may be the choice unless his knee shows sign of degenitive arthritis

Pony Boy
04-01-2011, 09:58 AM
Ok..... April fools...........you got me....

WolfpackGuy
04-01-2011, 10:02 AM
Any good RB's available?

LOL

HILife
04-01-2011, 11:52 AM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/20/Smoke_screen.jpg

HAT
04-01-2011, 12:58 PM
why can't we ever just go out and get the best DT in the draft?

We can....Take Peterson #2 and trade back into the low 20's to grab Liuget.

Viola! You've gotten the best CB & the best DT in the draft.

listopencil
04-01-2011, 03:05 PM
Why? It doesn't make sense he doesn't fit the profile of the LBs Fox has gone after.


As a small digression, it's worth pointing out that in order to run these types of blitzes, having fast linebackers and penetrating linemen is a must. I think this bodes quite well for Wesley Woodyard, who seems to be exactly the type of linebacker that would fit well in this scheme. In addition, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if the Broncos decided to select linebacker Von Miller out of Texas A&M at #2. Teaming Miller with DJ Williams (not my favorite, but still an above average linebacker in space) and Woodyard would immediately provide a linebacking corps that could execute the type of play we've seen here. Stopping the run could still be an issue, but we'll leave that subject for next week.

This is the last paragraph of the article, posted here:

http://www.itsalloverfatman.com/bron...overload-blitz

Doggcow
04-01-2011, 03:32 PM
I'm a huge fan of trading down because there are TONS of D-Lineman this year. The guys going 10-30 would be top 10's most years, I'd think, everyone is really solid.

ZONA
04-01-2011, 03:33 PM
I don't agree that some of the teams between 4-8 won't try and move up to the 2nd spot. Gabbert doesn't have as much pre-draft hype as other QB's in the past but each of those teams (Bills, Bengals, Cards, Browns, Titans and 49'ers) easily could move up to #2 for Gabbert if the Panthers don't take him. They all want a QB and that's 5 teams right there who might feel moving up a few spots and getting their QB is worth that 2nd round pick.

But to be real honest - I would not trade down if Dareus is there. The broncos need a DOMINANT DL and this guy looks to be just that. The only way I would even think about moving down is if we stayed in the top 5 while picking up that teams 2nd round pick also. That assures you are still going to get your hands on somebody like Fairley, Peterson, Miller or Bowers. Getting any one of those guys plus getting a top 5 pick in the 2nd round is almost too good to pass up.

Lomax
04-01-2011, 04:47 PM
Weak LB class, Deepest DL class in years.

If Von Miller's a better talent (and he looks to be elite), you have to get him. There will be impact DTs in the 2nd round.

BMarsh615
04-01-2011, 06:43 PM
I think we should pass on Miller and get Martez Wilson in the 2nd round. Wilson is bigger and faster than Miller and is a decent pass rusher as well.

rugbythug
04-01-2011, 06:58 PM
I think we should pass on Miller and get Martez Wilson in the 2nd round. Wilson is bigger and faster than Miller and is a decent pass rusher as well.

He is just not very good

BMarsh615
04-01-2011, 07:10 PM
<iframe title="YouTube video player" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Q_kX-cfzjjw" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="390" width="640"></iframe>

<iframe title="YouTube video player" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/eyQyGwR9KjI" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="390" width="640"></iframe>

<iframe title="YouTube video player" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/wJOyrM-VRrM" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="390" width="640"></iframe>

<iframe title="YouTube video player" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/wCcIIuMGi2M" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="390" width="640"></iframe>

<iframe title="YouTube video player" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Fs1CQqfDH-w" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="390" width="640"></iframe>

JDB7821
04-02-2011, 08:47 PM
We can....Take Peterson #2 and trade back into the low 20's to grab Liuget.

Viola! You've gotten the best CB & the best DT in the draft.

Obviously you can't know who is going to turn out to be the best, but I will say that it's much more possible for another DT to trump Fairley or Dareus than another linebacker/rush backer to trump Miller. The same can be said about Peterson. I definitely believe in building the front line first, but when you can have a star at linebacker or cornerback and a similar player who could turn out better later you should do it.

By the way, I'd love for the Broncos to trade up to 27 and we somehow take your two second rounders. Jerrel Jernigan and Allen Bailey/Sam Acho would be perfect.

mhgaffney
04-02-2011, 11:18 PM
Not a bad plan.

If you are correct about Liuget.

NFLBRONCO
04-02-2011, 11:29 PM
I don't see how a team that said, WE need more picks would turn around and trade up?

Doggcow
04-02-2011, 11:41 PM
Not a bad plan.

If you are correct about Liuget.

That would be a dream come true imo.

Peterson is a beast, Liuget will be solid. 2 cornerstones of a defense in one year, added to Doom. We would have 3 positions set for a decade.

McDman
04-03-2011, 06:21 AM
For those saying Peterson would be a terrible pick because it isn't drafting of need, I feel the same with Miller. You want to take a SAM LB #2 overall? Ugh...

guaranteed no one has said Peterson would be a terrible pick. Some people may not want him but no one is going to think it's a terrible pick.

McDman
04-03-2011, 06:23 AM
<iframe title="YouTube video player" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Q_kX-cfzjjw" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="390" width="640"></iframe>

<iframe title="YouTube video player" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/eyQyGwR9KjI" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="390" width="640"></iframe>

<iframe title="YouTube video player" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/wJOyrM-VRrM" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="390" width="640"></iframe>

<iframe title="YouTube video player" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/wCcIIuMGi2M" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="390" width="640"></iframe>

<iframe title="YouTube video player" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Fs1CQqfDH-w" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="390" width="640"></iframe>

You can't really tell how good anyone is by youtube videos. Even the worst players have some highlights they can throw together.

Cito Pelon
04-03-2011, 07:52 AM
Weak LB class, Deepest DL class in years.

If Von Miller's a better talent (and he looks to be elite), you have to get him. There will be impact DTs in the 2nd round.

Heck, if they like Miller or Peterson at #2 it's also possible to trade next year's #1 for a late 1st-rounder and still keep the #2's.

If the object is to load the D with young talent, that might be considered.

By trading next year's #1 they could conceivably grab Peterson/Miller, one or two of the top DL prospects, and a top TE/safety in the first two rounds.

Add in the possibility of trading down from #2, and there's quite a few combinations they could put together that could potentially build the D for a long time, and maybe add in a good receiving TE (which is kind of a glaring need).

In any case, they really should try to pick up one or two of the top DL prospects to go along with Elvis and Ayers. It would be nice to have a good, young DL.

Hercules Rockefeller
04-03-2011, 08:00 AM
No ****ing way you trade a future #1 on a team picking 2nd overall for a current year late 1st

Cito Pelon
04-03-2011, 08:16 AM
No ****ing way you trade a future #1 on a team picking 2nd overall for a current year late 1st

It's a huge gamble, no doubt. But a possibility when there are so many holes to fill on the defense, and this supposedly being a deep DL draft.

If Peterson or Miller are can't miss kind of players that won't be available after the top-five, it might be worth the gamble to pick one of them at #2 and go for one of the other top DL guys by moving back into Round 1.

And, in order to keep both the current 2nd rounders, it might be worth the gamble to trade next year's #1. It could possibly work out really well.

Beantown Bronco
04-03-2011, 08:20 AM
As I mentioned in the other thread, future picks cannot be traded in this year's draft unless a new CBA is agreed to first.

Shananahan
04-03-2011, 08:30 AM
If we have to go linebacker in the top ten I'd prefer we draft the guy with the most potential and upside towards getting to the quarterback.

See here:
<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/YE2y_ypR9wQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Cito Pelon
04-03-2011, 08:30 AM
As I mentioned in the other thread, future picks cannot be traded in this year's draft unless a new CBA is agreed to first.

Ah well, so much for that then. With 3 weeks til the draft I don't see a new CBA before then.

tsiguy96
04-03-2011, 08:31 AM
As I mentioned in the other thread, future picks cannot be traded in this year's draft unless a new CBA is agreed to first.

thats not true...teams were told to do so at their own risk, not that they cant do it.

http://andy-benoit.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22475988/26518159

elsid13
04-03-2011, 08:38 AM
thats not true...teams were told to do so at their own risk, not that they cant do it.

http://andy-benoit.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22475988/26518159

teams will error on the side of caution and won't be willing to trade future picks.

Cito Pelon
04-03-2011, 08:40 AM
thats not true...teams were told to do so at their own risk, not that they cant do it.

http://andy-benoit.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22475988/26518159

"picks both present and future can be traded during the draft"

That article was from December, 2010 - anything changed since then?

tsiguy96
04-03-2011, 08:41 AM
"picks both present and future can be traded during the draft"

That article was from December, 2010 - anything changed since then?

casserly is not going to get it wrong. last i read on PFT, teams were warned to trade future picks at their own risk (ie what if theres no draft next year or whatever) but they are allowed to.

Cito Pelon
04-03-2011, 09:04 AM
Obviously you can't know who is going to turn out to be the best, but I will say that it's much more possible for another DT to trump Fairley or Dareus than another linebacker/rush backer to trump Miller. The same can be said about Peterson. I definitely believe in building the front line first, but when you can have a star at linebacker or cornerback and a similar player who could turn out better later you should do it.

By the way, I'd love for the Broncos to trade up to 27 and we somehow take your two second rounders. Jerrel Jernigan and Allen Bailey/Sam Acho would be perfect.

That's a good point.

That One Guy
04-03-2011, 09:11 AM
teams will error on the side of caution and won't be willing to trade future picks.

I think it's more that teams wont be accepting future picks in trade. Those future picks hold almost zero value at this point because if the players truly insist on staying non-union, the draft almost certainly will be done away with.

You'd have to trade an entire future draft for a 3rd round pick or something at this point to entice someone to want to trade with you.

This is all presuming the owners truly don't know the direction things will go. If they have a strong reason to believe there will still be a draft, the situation changes some but I don't think they do.

Cito Pelon
04-03-2011, 09:14 AM
casserly is not going to get it wrong. last i read on PFT, teams were warned to trade future picks at their own risk (ie what if theres no draft next year or whatever) but they are allowed to.

Thinking out loud here . . . . . If a new CBA includes a rookie wage scale, then next year's first-rounders are MORE valuable, because there is less inherent risk.

Right, wrong?

So, if next year's 1st-rounders are MORE valuable than this year's first-rounders, does that mean teams will be more willing to trade?

That One Guy
04-03-2011, 09:30 AM
Thinking out loud here . . . . . If a new CBA includes a rookie wage scale, then next year's first-rounders are MORE valuable, because there is less inherent risk.

Right, wrong?

So, if next year's 1st-rounders are MORE valuable than this year's first-rounders, does that mean teams will be more willing to trade?

Potential promise of a cheaper rookie < risk of getting a draft pick in a draft that never happens

tsiguy96
04-03-2011, 09:38 AM
Thinking out loud here . . . . . If a new CBA includes a rookie wage scale, then next year's first-rounders are MORE valuable, because there is less inherent risk.

Right, wrong?

So, if next year's 1st-rounders are MORE valuable than this year's first-rounders, does that mean teams will be more willing to trade?

CBA would cover this year as well, draft picks cant sign until the CBA is done, and the CBA will likely include a wage scale. undrafted free agents cant sign at all after the draft which sucks.

misturanderson
04-03-2011, 09:54 AM
You can't really tell how good anyone is by youtube videos. Even the worst players have some highlights they can throw together.

Those aren't highlights, those are plays that went his direction edited together game by game. He looks good when he plays well and there are also examples of him missing plays and getting washed out with blocks.

I think he looks better (instincts-wise) than most people give him credit for and there are a ton of examples of him shedding blocks extremely well. I wouldn't be upset with picking him up in the 2nd.

Beantown Bronco
04-03-2011, 10:07 AM
thats not true...teams were told to do so at their own risk, not that they cant do it.

http://andy-benoit.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22475988/26518159

Interesing. I stand corrected....as does Mort, who on March 20th said the exact opposite.....That was the last I saw.

mortreport
RT @lde857: @mortreport @Micah_J_D Next year's draft is not provided for in expired CBA. So can't trade next yr's picks w/o new CBA.

tsiguy96
04-03-2011, 10:25 AM
Interesing. I stand corrected....as does Mort, who on March 20th said the exact opposite.....That was the last I saw.

mortreport
RT @lde857: @mortreport @Micah_J_D Next year's draft is not provided for in expired CBA. So can't trade next yr's picks w/o new CBA.

you cant trade those picks for players, but they can be traded for other picks. but thats dangerous, if you are denver do you want to trade your 3 for next years 2, with the possibility that there is no next years draft to use that 2? then you just gave away a pick, thats why NFL told teams do so at your own risk.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/04/01/picks-cant-be-traded-this-year-after-theyre-used/

This year, picks may not be traded after they are made, if the lockout has not ended.

“The Manning-Rivers type of trade cannot happen this year due to the lockout rules,” NFL spokesman Greg Aiello told PFT via e-mail on Friday. “A trade at this time can involve only draft picks. Once a pick is made, the player cannot be traded (or signed) until a new league start begins. No player transactions are currently permitted.”

Future draft picks may be traded as well. Chris Mortensen of ESPN reported last month that the league has informed teams that any team that gives up a 2011 draft pick for a future draft pick does so at its own risk, given the chance that the Tom Brady antitrust lawsuit will result by next April in a ruling that the draft is illegal.

NFLBRONCO
04-03-2011, 11:08 AM
Denver will be picking high next year no way would I trade it for another pick this year. Too many needs new systems to learn.

Cito Pelon
04-03-2011, 11:21 AM
Denver will be picking high next year no way would I trade it for another pick this year. Too many needs new systems to learn.

Well hell, the sooner they get D guys into the system the better the D should be. If this DL draft is so great they should take advantage of it and next year can take care of itself.

zdoor
04-03-2011, 02:41 PM
Trading a future #1 is a terrible idea. It will likely be high and would torpedo building thru the draft for the long haul. Good news is there is likely no chance th FO does it. trading down a few from #2 and picking up extra picks would have angels singing however...

NFLBRONCO
04-03-2011, 02:47 PM
Well hell, the sooner they get D guys into the system the better the D should be. If this DL draft is so great they should take advantage of it and next year can take care of itself.

I would think we could find 1 player in the top 10 that could help us though. We have too many needs and questions to risk.

Lolad
04-03-2011, 02:55 PM
I haven't been following the draft, but If what everybody is saying is true about a deep DL. "IF" we could move back and snag miller plus pick up and extra pick (who cares I'll take a 3rd or 4th) I'll be happy. From what ive heard miller is an every down player so talking about taking a SAM this high in the draft is negligible

Dedhed
04-03-2011, 03:21 PM
I had a dream we took Miller with the #5 overall selection. I'll bump this thread when it happens.....

......and someone else will bump it when it doesn't.

epicSocialism4tw
04-03-2011, 04:38 PM
I had a dream we took Miller with the #5 overall selection. I'll bump this thread when it happens.....

......and someone else will bump it when it doesn't.

I had a dream last night that the Broncos drafted a man with a dogs head. He walked calmly and confidently up to the podium, put on his Broncos cap, grabbed his half of the jersey, turned to face the cameras and began barking profusely at an incredible volume. Broncos fans cheered in agreement.

Then the walls fell one by one outwardly and the entire studio were grabbed by the talons of griffins and taken one by one to a floating doughnut piloted by Homer Simpson. Patrick Peterson was there teaching Calculus III to Christian Ponder. Homer piloted the doughnut to Mobile, Alabama where there was rumored to be a leprechaun living in a tree in the Crichton projects.

NFLBRONCO
04-03-2011, 05:02 PM
Reality is Peterson is only one piece on a D with lots of holes
Reality is Miller is only one piece on a D with lots of holes
Reality is Dareus is only one piece on a D with lots of holes

I just hope whoever we select turns out to be the best player of the 3 thats what we need.

Pat Bowlen
04-03-2011, 05:44 PM
Reality is what you can get away with.

Dedhed
04-03-2011, 05:53 PM
Reality is Peterson is only one piece on a D with lots of holes
Reality is Miller is only one piece on a D with lots of holes
Reality is Dareus is only one piece on a D with lots of holes

I just hope whoever we select turns out to be the best player of the 3 thats what we need.

That's been my argument for Peterson all along. He's the best player in the draft.

Dedhed
04-03-2011, 06:04 PM
I had a dream last night that the Broncos drafted a man with a dogs head. He walked calmly and confidently up to the podium, put on his Broncos cap, grabbed his half of the jersey, turned to face the cameras and began barking profusely at an incredible volume. Broncos fans cheered in agreement.

Then the walls fell one by one outwardly and the entire studio were grabbed by the talons of griffins and taken one by one to a floating doughnut piloted by Homer Simpson. Patrick Peterson was there teaching Calculus III to Christian Ponder. Homer piloted the doughnut to Mobile, Alabama where there was rumored to be a leprechaun living in a tree in the Crichton projects.

Cool Starry...

Was that your attempt at wit?

epicSocialism4tw
04-03-2011, 07:50 PM
Cool Starry...

Was that your attempt at wit?

I was just adding a little reality to your dream.

NFLBRONCO
04-03-2011, 08:09 PM
That's been my argument for Peterson all along. He's the best player in the draft.

I'm with you on this one I'd draft Peterson. I do think Denver will go Dareus which would fill a bigger position need which is cool by me. My view is though our D needs studs everywhere its just step one of 4 steps that is needed to upgrade our D.

DefensiveBehavior
04-04-2011, 08:20 PM
why can't we ever just go out and get the best DT in the draft?

Probably because we never draft higher than 15-20 ( exception of cutler,moreno 11,12 )

JCMElway
04-07-2011, 05:51 PM
Interesting take on why Miller makes no sense...

Denver Broncos: Von Miller, DE/OLB, Texas A&M
I didn't even consider Von Miller as a possible option for the Broncos until a particular sun-tanned NFL Draft analyst for ESPN mocked Miller No. 2 overall.

I really don't understand the thought process behind that. Miller is the top 3-4 player in this class, so why mock him to a 4-3 squad? And even if Denver wants to use Miller as a pass-rushing specialist, they already have an identical player (Elvis Dumervil) to do that. This pick makes absolutely no sense to me.

tsiguy96
04-07-2011, 07:22 PM
multiple people see him as a fit at LB in 4-3, since hes fast enough to keep up with the fastest TEs in the game in coverage and can blitz the edge

And 4-3 defensive teams, such as the Broncos, see an outside linebacker who can rush the passer effectively and is strong enough to play the run as well as drop into coverage.
When asked what position he thought Miller would project in the Broncos' scheme, coach John Fox said the strongside spot. That's telling because it shows how physical the Broncos believe Miller would be as an outside linebacker.
Fox and defensive coordinator Dennis Allen would also have the option of adding Miller to the rush from the strongside, which would put him on tight ends and right tackles in pass protection. Miller would hold the athletic advantage against these players given his speed (high 4.4s, low 4.5s in the 40-yard dash) and deep reservoir of rush moves.


Read more: Texas A&M linebacker Von Miller rising in NFL draft - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_17779595#ixzz1ItVw4LCt
Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content: http://www.denverpost.com/termsofuse

miller is a top 5 draft pick this year.

Lomax
04-07-2011, 08:37 PM
Interesting take on why Miller makes no sense...

Denver Broncos: Von Miller, DE/OLB, Texas A&M
I didn't even consider Von Miller as a possible option for the Broncos until a particular sun-tanned NFL Draft analyst for ESPN mocked Miller No. 2 overall.

I really don't understand the thought process behind that. Miller is the top 3-4 player in this class, so why mock him to a 4-3 squad? And even if Denver wants to use Miller as a pass-rushing specialist, they already have an identical player (Elvis Dumervil) to do that. This pick makes absolutely no sense to me.

Here's how I reason the Miller selection:

First, Miller is one of the top 3 prospects. 1. Peterson, 2. Green, 3. Miller. If you pick at #2, you don't pass on top prospects to fill needs. And you don't pass on top prospects because they don't fit into a rigid box of your "scheme". You get the top prospects and work them into your scheme. As a coach, if you can't do that, you need another line of work.

Second, Miller is a LB first, a pass rusher second. Yes, he rushes extremely well, but he is fluid in coverage, and has the speed we need at the second level. He is not in any way the same player that Doom is. Doom is an undersized DE that we converted to LB, but he is not a true LB and would struggle as a 4-3 Sam.

Third, selecting Miller doesn't prevent us from getting stronger upfront. We are virtually guaranteed to have starting calibur DTs available to us at 36. With the depth at DT we could kill two birds with one stone. On the other hand, after Miller, the depth falls off dramatically at LB.

Fourth, Miller fills a HUGE need at Sam. He's not projected to us because analysts don't realize or haven't factored in that with the move to 4-3, Doom and Ayers are no longer OLBs for us. OLB is a need. Pass rush is a need. Disruptors are a need. We can solve all of those needs and become a top pass rushing team by adding Miller.

Or we can draft a lesser player at 2 and still have a huge gaping hole at LB to fill.

Chris
04-07-2011, 08:51 PM
We will have huge gaping holes to fill regardless. Dareus is the clog that fills our hole and makes the team scream for joy.

Dukes
04-07-2011, 08:56 PM
You have to respect a dude who can wear BCG's everyday. (The military folk around here will at least get that.)

NFLBRONCO
04-07-2011, 09:04 PM
Probably because we never draft higher than 15-20 ( exception of cutler,moreno 11,12 )

Clady 12

bronco militia
04-21-2011, 10:23 AM
cutler 11

Pick Six
04-21-2011, 11:52 AM
If teams can't trade players or future picks, it's going to be a quiet draft, IMO. That disappoints me. The drama of the draft is what I anticipate every year...

razorwire77
04-21-2011, 11:59 AM
Interesting take on why Miller makes no sense...

Denver Broncos: Von Miller, DE/OLB, Texas A&M
I didn't even consider Von Miller as a possible option for the Broncos until a particular sun-tanned NFL Draft analyst for ESPN mocked Miller No. 2 overall.

I really don't understand the thought process behind that. Miller is the top 3-4 player in this class, so why mock him to a 4-3 squad? And even if Denver wants to use Miller as a pass-rushing specialist, they already have an identical player (Elvis Dumervil) to do that. This pick makes absolutely no sense to me.

Probably because he would be a freaky strong, big, fast Sam LB in a 4-3.

Beantown Bronco
04-21-2011, 12:14 PM
If teams can't trade players or future picks, it's going to be a quiet draft, IMO. That disappoints me. The drama of the draft is what I anticipate every year...

Well, they most certainly CAN trade future picks. Whether or not anyone will risk it is the question.