PDA

View Full Version : Broncos "love" Peterson, not as high on Dareus


Pages : [1] 2

tsiguy96
04-25-2011, 06:55 PM
Sources tell CBS Sports' Rob Rang that the Broncos "love" LSU CB Patrick Peterson, and "aren't as high" on Alabama DT Marcell Dareus.
The suggestion appears to be that Peterson is higher on Denver's board than Dareus. With the first round just three days away, three players appear to be in the hunt for No. 2 overall: Dareus, Peterson, and Von Miller. Our bet is still on Dareus, but both of his "competitors" are elite enough for a late upset.

from roto.
link to original tweet:
http://twitter.com/#!/RobRang/statuses/62686502165020672

you could tell how much they like peterson from the press conference, they couldnt hide their enthusiasm.

oubronco
04-25-2011, 07:01 PM
It's Miller then

WolfpackGuy
04-25-2011, 07:03 PM
"Let the battle begin!!!"

http://lh4.ggpht.com/_vLhJsfQSOxQ/Sdvju0DtCWI/AAAAAAAAEJc/MmbGLe7YxbE/s400/wing%20luke%20031.jpg

OrangeSe7en
04-25-2011, 07:03 PM
Great. I cant wait to boo Peterson when he ****s up and other times when he doesn't.

DarkHorse
04-25-2011, 07:04 PM
Any of those 3 and i'm a very very happy birthday boy

TheReverend
04-25-2011, 07:04 PM
As well they should be. Two DB coaches know special when they see it.

JDB7821
04-25-2011, 07:06 PM
Patrick Peterson and Stephen Paea is a much better 1-2 than a Marcell Dareus and someone like Brandon Harris.

RhymesayersDU
04-25-2011, 07:08 PM
I've been talked into Peterson. I was a no-CB guy, but as long was we get front-7 help in the second round, then go for it.

schaaf
04-25-2011, 07:09 PM
Patrick Peterson and Stephen Paea is a much better 1-2 than a Marcell Dareus and someone like Brandon Harris.

that is a damn good point...props

schaaf
04-25-2011, 07:12 PM
I've thought that the FO has felt this way for a while now.. I think they feel that Dareus will be solid but that they can't pass up a player like Miller or Peterson for a "solid" player

OrangeSe7en
04-25-2011, 07:14 PM
that is a damn good point...props

Have they even brought Paea in for a visit? Havent they brought in Dareus and Harris?

tsiguy96
04-25-2011, 07:14 PM
Patrick Peterson and Stephen Paea is a much better 1-2 than a Marcell Dareus and someone like Brandon Harris.

this is my thinking as well, which is why ive warmed up to peterson, but still want miller, then peterson, then dareus.

schaaf
04-25-2011, 07:14 PM
just a Q... When they talk about Peterson in the press conference is it in part 1 or part 2

montrose
04-25-2011, 07:15 PM
I want elite at #2 - Peterson or Miller for me.

Mogulseeker
04-25-2011, 07:16 PM
A. I love draft time... people commenting on ****, no one really knows anything.

B. This goes counter to a lot os stuff I've heard from Xanders.

TheReverend
04-25-2011, 07:17 PM
For the Broncos, the past and the future both wear 7.



http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Patrick-Peterson1.jpg

Missouribronc
04-25-2011, 07:18 PM
Um, he won't wear 7 in Denver.

Bigdawg26
04-25-2011, 07:18 PM
I would love Peterson if we trade down to 4 or 5 and pick up a second or third round pick.

OrangeSe7en
04-25-2011, 07:19 PM
Um, he won't wear 7 in Denver.

No, he's saying Elway is so egotistical that he'd draft someone on the basis of him wearing #7.

JDB7821
04-25-2011, 07:20 PM
I've thought that the FO has felt this way for a while now.. I think they feel that Dareus will be solid but that they can't pass up a player like Miller or Peterson for a "solid" player

I completely agree. I don't intend to knock Dareus, because I think he's going to be a solid guy on the line for a lot of years. It's just that as the front office has stated, you have to get multiple Pro Bowls out of this pick. The #2 pick is meant for drafting someone who can develop into one of the best at his position in the NFL and I see that player being Peterson or Miller much more than Dareus.

And as a disclaimer, I am one of those people who believe you build a team from the inside out. However, you can't pass on elite talent at a different position for a solid player on the line. You can get solid players at any position later in the draft.

TheReverend
04-25-2011, 07:20 PM
Um, he won't wear 7 in Denver.

No **** Sherlock.

TheReverend
04-25-2011, 07:21 PM
No, he's saying Elway is so egotistical that he'd draft someone on the basis of him wearing #7.

No, I'm saying it's a sweet coincidence.

Archer81
04-25-2011, 07:21 PM
Talent on defense is the goal. I dont care if its in the secondary, LB corps or along the line. If they fit what you want to do, get them.

:Broncos:

Missouribronc
04-25-2011, 07:22 PM
No **** Sherlock.

Are you going to flip your **** when Denver doesn't take Peterson at 2 if he's available?

OrangeSe7en
04-25-2011, 07:23 PM
I completely agree. I don't intend to knock Dareus, because I think he's going to be a solid guy on the line for a lot of years. It's just that as the front office has stated, you have to get multiple Pro Bowls out of this pick. The #2 pick is meant for drafting someone who can develop into one of the best at his position in the NFL and I see that player being Peterson or Miller much more than Dareus.

And as a disclaimer, I am one of those people who believe you build a team from the inside out. However, you can't pass on elite talent at a different position for a solid player on the line. You can get solid players at any position later in the draft.


And that would mean more if this was a great CB class. But its not. On the other hand, its supposed to be a strong DT class. And so on that basis, Peterson is going to make a lot of pro bowls while Dareus or Fairley wont.

Whatevs.

TheReverend
04-25-2011, 07:23 PM
Are you going to flip your **** when Denver doesn't take Peterson at 2 if he's available?

If it's Cam Newton? Yes

If it's Gabbert? Maybe

Anyone else? Not at all.

TheReverend
04-25-2011, 07:24 PM
And that would mean more if this was a great CB class. But its not. On the other hand, its supposed to be a strong DT class. And so on that basis, Peterson is going to make a lot of pro bowls while Dareus or Fairley wont.

Whatevs.

I'm not sure you understand what a "deep class" means...

OrangeSe7en
04-25-2011, 07:25 PM
I'm not sure you understand what a "deep class" means...

Im not sure you understand what "understand" means. But thats OK. Its not like I asked you anything.

TheReverend
04-25-2011, 07:26 PM
Im not sure you understand what "understand" means. But thats OK. Its not like I asked you anything.

Another great addition to a thread topic.

schaaf
04-25-2011, 07:26 PM
Im not sure you understand what "understand" means. But thats OK. Its not like I asked you anything.

oh ****!

Dexter
04-25-2011, 07:28 PM
I love how people are hating on TheReverend for having an opinion. I'm going to laugh my ass off if the Broncos take Peterson. It's like people are going out of their way to act like A-Holes.

Because life would be so much better if everyone agreed with eachother right?Hilarious!

oubronco
04-25-2011, 07:28 PM
As long as we get elite talent on this Defense wherever it is how can we complain?

Have you all forgot how pathetic this Defense has been?

BroncoInferno
04-25-2011, 07:28 PM
For the Broncos, the past and the future both wear 7.



http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Patrick-Peterson1.jpg

Goddamn that pic is awesome! Still want Miller slightly more, but I'll be thrilled if we end up with Peterson.

schaaf
04-25-2011, 07:29 PM
As long as we get elite talent on this Defense wherever it is how can we complain?

Have you all forgot how pathetic this Defense has been?

**** THAT! you only draft defensive line in the first round! you build from the "inside out"...that is the only way to get a good defense!!!!

BroncoInferno
04-25-2011, 07:30 PM
Im not sure you understand what "understand" means. But thats OK. Its not like I asked you anything.

You're getting your ass kicked, bud. Just throw in the towel.

BroncoInferno
04-25-2011, 07:31 PM
If it's Cam Newton? Yes

If it's Gabbert? Maybe

Anyone else? Not at all.

Yep. As long as it's Miller, Peterson, Fairley or Dareus (in that order), I will be happy.

oubronco
04-25-2011, 07:32 PM
**** THAT! you only draft defensive line in the first round! you build from the "inside out"...that is the only way to get a good defense!!!!

I agree with with building inside out but for me it doesn't matter when we get D-line as long as we get D-line and if we can throw in an elite LB or CB so be it

TheReverend
04-25-2011, 07:33 PM
I agree with with building inside out but for me it doesn't matter when we get D-line as long as we get D-line and if we can throw in an elite LB or CB so be it

I think he was being sarcastic and making fun of people actually.

JDB7821
04-25-2011, 07:33 PM
And that would mean more if this was a great CB class. But its not. On the other hand, its supposed to be a strong DT class. And so on that basis, Peterson is going to make a lot of pro bowls while Dareus or Fairley wont.

Whatevs.

I think your logic is a little backwards. If this was a weak defensive tackle class and a guy like Dareus stood head and shoulders above the rest, then I would give him a stronger consideration. Since, like you said, this is a deep DT class then you can find talent later in the draft. The fact that this is a weak cornerback class with an elite talent at the top adds to the reason the Broncos should take Peterson. Again, I might have missed your point, but that's the way I comprehended it.

schaaf
04-25-2011, 07:37 PM
I agree with with building inside out but for me it doesn't matter when we get D-line as long as we get D-line and if we can throw in an elite LB or CB so be it

haha sorry OU i thought you could tell i was being sarcastic, I completely agree with what you said

Pony Boy
04-25-2011, 07:39 PM
I bet we find out who it is on Thursday

Chris
04-25-2011, 07:41 PM
I've said it before... if Miller, Dareus or Fairley had picks of them in the rain with cool looking uniforms... you'd be creaming over them too.

oubronco
04-25-2011, 07:43 PM
haha sorry OU i thought you could tell i was being sarcastic, I completely agree with what you said

No problem i just don't get why everyones getting so bent out of shape already

OrangeSe7en
04-25-2011, 07:43 PM
I think your logic is a little backwards. If this was a weak defensive tackle class and a guy like Dareus stood head and shoulders above the rest, then I would give him a stronger consideration. Since, like you said, this is a deep DT class then you can find talent later in the draft. The fact that this is a weak cornerback class with an elite talent at the top adds to the reason the Broncos should take Peterson. Again, I might have missed your point, but that's the way I comprehended it.

Theres no guarantee of that. And if you can, it would make more sense to give yourself the possibility of getting two DTs before it thins out. Im surprised this has to be pointed out to someone who claims to be an advocate of building your defense from front to back.

Drek
04-25-2011, 07:44 PM
I've waffled on Peterson all off-season. I absolutely love his talent, but we might never have a shot at an elite DT again any time soon.

Ultimately its up to the Broncos FO (obviously). I'm just hoping the reasons they take each one is the following:

Dareus - viewed as close in total talent to Peterson and Miller, feel the DT is essential.

Peterson - They view him as head and shoulders above the rest of the class.

Miller - feel his talents are too unique to pass up and have a very special way in mind to use him.

oubronco
04-25-2011, 07:46 PM
I've waffled on Peterson all off-season. I absolutely love his talent, but we might never have a shot at an elite DT again any time soon.

Ultimately its up to the Broncos FO (obviously). I'm just hoping the reasons they take each one is the following:

Dareus - viewed as close in total talent to Peterson and Miller, feel the DT is essential.

Peterson - They view him as head and shoulders above the rest of the class.

Miller - feel his talents are too unique to pass up and have a very special way in mind to use him.

This is why I think they pick Miller

JLesSPE
04-25-2011, 07:48 PM
Theres no guarantee of that. And if you can, it would make more sense to give yourself the possibility of getting two DTs before it thins out. Im surprised this has to be pointed out to someone who claims to be an advocate of building your defense from front to back.

If only we had multiple picks in the second round...

JDB7821
04-25-2011, 07:48 PM
Theres no guarantee of that. And if you can, it would make more sense to give yourself the possibility of getting two DTs before it thins out.

There's also no guarantee that either Peterson, Miller, or Dareus is going to turn into a Pro Bowler. You have to trust the grade of the player. It's my opinion that the collective grades of Peterson and Paea would be higher than Dareus and Harris. You get an elite player (as graded) at cornerback and a starter at defensive tackle with potential over a solid-great player and potential starter at cornerback.

I also don't agree with getting two defensive tackles. Since the Broncos need help on all three levels, you have to assess the grades of the players accordingly. You take the players that give you the highest amount of talent at their selected positions and draft spots. Like I said, I believe in building from the inside out, but you simply do not pass on elite talent. I think a guy like Paea can wind up being close to or better than Dareus than a guy like Harris can be to Peterson.

underrated29
04-25-2011, 07:50 PM
We have looked at a lot of 2nd/3rd/4th round DTs- which means we will be taking one in those rounds.


But a combo of dareus and austin is better than pp and paea

imo

underrated29
04-25-2011, 07:52 PM
There's also no guarantee that either Peterson, Miller, or Dareus is going to turn into a Pro Bowler. You have to trust the grade of the player. It's my opinion that the collective grades of Peterson and Paea would be higher than Dareus and Harris. You get an elite player (as graded) at cornerback and a starter at defensive tackle with potential over a solid-great player and potential starter at cornerback.

I also don't agree with getting two defensive tackles. Since the Broncos need help on all three levels, you have to assess the grades of the players accordingly. You take the players that give you the highest amount of talent at their selected positions and draft spots. Like I said, I believe in building from the inside out, but you simply do not pass on elite talent. I think a guy like Paea can wind up being close to or better than Dareus than a guy like Harris can be to Peterson.




well dude you can bet your ass we will be taking at least 2 dts. We only have 1 on the roster. just 1.

So even if we draft 1 to go with our existing 1 we will still need a minimum of 2 more DTs.....And what 2 DTs do you think we can get in FA that will be better than jamal williams and justin bannan? I cant think of any...Which once again puts us in the screwed category.

Odds are in favor of us walking away with at least 2 dts from this draft.

Broncobiv
04-25-2011, 07:55 PM
Is it Thursday yet?? :tearhair:

JDB7821
04-25-2011, 07:56 PM
well dude you can bet your ass we will be taking at least 2 dts. We only have 1 on the roster. just 1.

So even if we draft 1 to go with our existing 1 we will still need a minimum of 2 more DTs.....And what 2 DTs do you think we can get in FA that will be better than jamal williams and justin bannan? I cant think of any...Which once again puts us in the screwed category.

Odds are in favor of us walking away with at least 2 dts from this draft.

I never said they wouldn't take two defensive tackles in this draft. I just don't think they'll take two within the first two picks. Could they take two within their first three-four picks? Absolutely.

OrangeSe7en
04-25-2011, 07:57 PM
There's also no guarantee that either Peterson, Miller, or Dareus is going to turn into a Pro Bowler. You have to trust the grade of the player. It's my opinion that the collective grades of Peterson and Paea would be higher than Dareus and Harris. You get an elite player (as graded) at cornerback and a starter at defensive tackle with potential over a solid-great player and potential starter at cornerback.

I also don't agree with getting two defensive tackles. Since the Broncos need help on all three levels, you have to assess the grades of the players accordingly. You take the players that give you the highest amount of talent at their selected positions and draft spots. Like I said, I believe in building from the inside out, but you simply do not pass on elite talent. I think a guy like Paea can wind up being close to or better than Dareus than a guy like Harris can be to Peterson.

Youre barking up the wrong tree. In case you haven't noticed, this is a Denver Broncos themed message board. That means most people here have watched Champ Bailey's skills wasted for severa years because of a shoddy defensive line. During this time, we've also seen other defenses generate turnovers with lesser DBs because they have quality defensive lines. Its whats up font that matters most. If Dareus is better than Paea, you take Dareus. Defensive line has a bigger impact. You cant just give grades in a vacuum and pretend like theyre (ie DBs and DL) weighted equally. Theyre not.

JDub15
04-25-2011, 07:59 PM
Patrick Peterson and Stephen Paea is a much better 1-2 than a Marcell Dareus and someone like Brandon Harris.

This! DT class is extremely deep... take Peterson!

lostknight
04-25-2011, 08:00 PM
Peterson's low low low Wonderlic scares the snot out of me. But I agree that the biggest single problem we have right now is at Safety.

JDB7821
04-25-2011, 08:03 PM
Youre barking up the wrong tree. In case you haven't noticed, this is a Denver Broncos themed message board. That means most people here have watched Champ Bailey's skills wasted for severa years because of a shoddy defensive line. During this time, we've also seen other defenses generate turnovers with lesser DBs because they have quality defensive lines. Its whats up font that matters most. If Dareus is better than Paea, you take Dareus. Defensive line has a bigger impact. You cant just give grades in a vacuum and pretend like theyre (ie DBs and DL) weighted equally. Theyre not.

I completely agree that certain positions take precedent over others. You will not get an argument over that with me. I'm saying that when one position player outside of the lines or quarterback has such a higher grade, as I believe Peterson does, then you have to take them. Defensive linemen, offensive linemen, and certainly quarterbacks get a premium in the draft due to their position. I just think that Peterson has a grade, regardless of position, of roughly 8-9/10 and that Dareus is about a 6.5-7. I would give Dareus another point just because of the position he plays, but it still doesn't equal the elite talent that Peterson has.

SureShot
04-25-2011, 08:07 PM
Peterson's low low low Wonderlic scares the snot out of me. But I agree that the biggest single problem we have right now is at Safety.

Deon Sanders scored a 7 and Asante Samuel scored a 10. Tebow didnt exactly light the Wonderlic up either.

JDub15
04-25-2011, 08:07 PM
Youre barking up the wrong tree. In case you haven't noticed, this is a Denver Broncos themed message board. That means most people here have watched Champ Bailey's skills wasted for severa years because of a shoddy defensive line. During this time, we've also seen other defenses generate turnovers with lesser DBs because they have quality defensive lines. Its whats up font that matters most. If Dareus is better than Paea, you take Dareus. Defensive line has a bigger impact. You cant just give grades in a vacuum and pretend like theyre (ie DBs and DL) weighted equally. Theyre not.

The Houston Texans, Dallas Cowboys, Minnesota Vikings, and Detroit Lions disagree with you.

Oh so do the 2009 Broncos who had a top 10 defense with a defensive line that featured Ron Fields, Ryan McBean, and ?

The Oakland Raiders lead the league in adjusted sack rate last season (sacks as a percentage of pass attempts faced) at 9.5% and still ended up in the bottom half the league (17th) in pass defense.

TheReverend
04-25-2011, 08:11 PM
Deon Sanders scored a 7 and Asante Samuel scored a 10. Tebow didnt exactly light the Wonderlic up either.

Fox's old DB, Rod Woodson, just wrote "C" for every answer.

OrangeSe7en
04-25-2011, 08:14 PM
I completely agree that certain positions take precedent over others. You will not get an argument over that with me. I'm saying that when one position player outside of the lines or quarterback has such a higher grade, as I believe Peterson does, then you have to take them. Defensive linemen, offensive linemen, and certainly quarterbacks get a premium in the draft due to their position. I just think that Peterson has a grade, regardless of position, of roughly 8-9/10 and that Dareus is about a 6.5-7. I would give Dareus another point just because of the position he plays, but it still doesn't equal the elite talent that Peterson has.

And without a defensive line, Petersons rating is 0. Besides. your grading system is an arbitrary assignment of value that offers no guarantees of accuracy. I actually think Petersons value is inflated because he's looked at in relation to the other DBs because its a weak DB class. Id venture to guess thats affecting your perception of his value as well. Meanwhile, since Dareus is in a stronger DT class than Peterson's DB class, there is less of a margin between Dareus and, say, Fairley or whoever. This gap from 1 to 2 affects how people are scoring because it affects perception. I know people will try to deny it and convince themselves that theyre graded on some "objective" criteria but this is more myth than fact. I think you're undervaluing Dareus because he's in a strong DT class while youre inflating Petersons value because he's in a bad DB class. You have to be careful not to be held hostage by a bad DB class and be squeezed into following the back to front formula. And another problem is, you have no way of knowing that a 5.5 for a DL is the same as a 5.5 for a DB in some meaningful way. Again, defensive linemen have a greater impact than DBs. And thats pretty much it. End of story.

OrangeSe7en
04-25-2011, 08:18 PM
The Houston Texans, Dallas Cowboys, Minnesota Vikings, and Detroit Lions disagree with you.

Oh so do the 2009 Broncos who had a top 10 defense with a defensive line that featured Ron Fields, Ryan McBean, and ?

The Oakland Raiders lead the league in adjusted sack rate last season (sacks as a percentage of pass attempts faced) at 9.5% and still ended up in the bottom half the league (17th) in pass defense.

Im not sure if this is supposed to be a serious rebuttal.

Its probably not a good idea to wonder into a Denver Broncos message board and throw around our past defenses as an example of whats what. Thats 2009 defense did well at the beginning of the season because of scheme and Dumervil. But eventually the defense wore down and other teams started having an answer for it. A lot of it was smoke and mirrors. Nolan did a great job at the beginning of the season. It might have continued depending on how much Nolan was phased out. But theres no guarantee of that and it was the same story in 2006. You can only do it with smoke and mirrors for so long. You need to be able to legitimately win with your front 7.

TheReverend
04-25-2011, 08:20 PM
And without a defensive line, Petersons rating is 0. Besides. your grading system is an arbitrary assignment of value that offers no guarantees of accuracy. I actually think Petersons value is inflated because he's looked at in relation to the other DBs because its a weak DB class. Id venture to guess thats affecting your perception of his value as well. Meanwhile, since Dareus is in a stronger DT class than Peterson's DB class, there is less of a margin between Dareus and, say, Fairley or whoever. This gap from 1 to 2 affects how people are scoring because it affects perception. I know people will try to deny it and convince themselves that theyre graded on some "objective" criteria but this is more myth than fact. I think you're undervaluing Dareus because he's in a strong DT class while youre inflating Petersons value because he's in a bad DB class. You have to be careful not to be held hostage by a bad DB class and be squeezed into following the back to front formula. And another problem is, you have no way of knowing that a 5.5 for a DL is the same as a 5.5 for a DB in some meaningful way. Again, defensive linemen have a greater impact than DBs. And thats pretty much it. End of story.

On field performance:

* 2010 First-Team Walter Camp All-American
* 2010 Thorpe Award Winner
* 2010 Bednarik Award Winner
* 2010 SEC Defensive Player of the Year
* 2010 Preseason All-American (TSN, Playboy, Athlon, Lindy's, Phil Steele)
* 2009 Second-Team All-America (TSN)
* 2009 First-Team All-SEC (ESPN)
* 2009 Second-Team All-SEC (AP, Coaches)
* 2007 High School Defensive Player of the Year (USA Today)

Physical measurables:

When asked about LSU cornerback Patrick Peterson, Fox said: "I'll be honest with you, I had Rod Woodson, Gil Byrd, I've had some pretty good guys. I've never seen anything like (Peterson), with that size, that speed. I don't think there's been a 219-pound guy run a 4.3. He's a special talent. That's the way the game's changed, he's about the same height as Rod, but 219 pounds and ran 4.3."

And he's getting "inflated" for being in a "weak CB class" (it's not weak, btw)

Sounds legit.

gyldenlove
04-25-2011, 08:21 PM
The Houston Texans, Dallas Cowboys, Minnesota Vikings, and Detroit Lions disagree with you.

Oh so do the 2009 Broncos who had a top 10 defense with a defensive line that featured Ron Fields, Ryan McBean, and ?

The Oakland Raiders lead the league in adjusted sack rate last season (sacks as a percentage of pass attempts faced) at 9.5% and still ended up in the bottom half the league (17th) in pass defense.

? = Vonnie Holliday and Kenny Peterson

JDB7821
04-25-2011, 08:24 PM
And without a defensive line, Petersons rating is 0. Besides. your grading system is an arbitrary assignment of value that offers no guarantees of accuracy. I actually think Petersons value is inflated because he's looked at in relation to the other DBs because its a weak DB class. Id venture to guess thats affecting your perception of his value as well. Meanwhile, since Dareus is in a stronger DT class than Peterson's DB class, there is less of a margin between Dareus and, say, Fairley or whoever. This gap from 1 to 2 affects how people are scoring because it affects perception. I know people will try to deny it and convince themselves that theyre graded on some "objective" criteria but this is more myth than fact. I think you're undervaluing Dareus because he's in a strong DT class while youre inflating Petersons value because he's in a bad DB class. You have to be careful not to be held hostage by a bad DB class and be squeezed into following the back to front formula. And another problem is, you have no way of knowing that a 5.5 for a DL is the same as a 5.5 for a DB in some meaningful way. Again, defensive linemen have a greater impact than DBs. And thats pretty much it. End of story.

If you think my perception is being skewed because of the depth of either position, I beg you to look at it in a different light. Take last year's draft and plug both of these players into it. Would you take Dareus over Suh or McCoy? I wouldn't. Would you take Peterson over Joe Haden? I would in a heartbeat.

Go back another year. Would I take Dareus over BJ Raji? No. Would I take Peterson over Malcolm Jenkins? Absolutely.

In 2008, would I take Dareus over Glenn Dorsey? No. Would I take Peterson over Leodis McKelvin? Again, yes.

You can say my views are being inflated by the depth of the class, but when I look at the top picks of the past few years at their position, Peterson wins every time. I wouldn't take Dareus over any of the past few top defensive tackle picks.

HILife
04-25-2011, 08:24 PM
I'm fine with any of those picks.

OrangeSe7en
04-25-2011, 08:29 PM
If you think my perception is being skewed because of the depth of either position, I beg you to look at it in a different light. Take last year's draft and plug both of these players into it. Would you take Dareus over Suh or McCoy? I wouldn't. Would you take Peterson over Joe Haden? I would in a heartbeat.

Go back another year. Would I take Dareus over BJ Raji? No. Would I take Peterson over Malcolm Jenkins? Absolutely.

In 2008, would I take Dareus over Glenn Dorsey? No. Would I take Peterson over Leodis McKelvin? Again, yes.

You can say my views are being inflated by the depth of the class, but when I look at the top picks of the past few years at their position, Peterson wins every time. I wouldn't take Dareus over any of the past few top defensive tackle picks.

All of this is easy to say well after the fact and after your perception has been challenged. Im not sold because Im not so sure anyone wouldnt take Dareus or Fairley over Dorsey. And Raji was so good he lasted until 9 in a weaker DT class. But youre trying to sell something to the contrary. I have a hard time buying this.

lostknight
04-25-2011, 08:32 PM
I'm more interested in him as a free safety then anything else.

JDB7821
04-25-2011, 08:34 PM
All of this is easy to say well after the fact and after your perception has been challenged. Im not sold because Im not so sure anyone wouldnt take Dareus or Fairley over Dorsey. And Raji was so good he lasted until 9 in a weaker DT class. But youre trying to sell something to the contrary. I have a hard time buying this.

You try to bring my perceptions into this conversation as an apparent flaw, but you're trying to say no one would take Dorsey over Dareus or Fairley? I've been following the draft avidly for almost 10 years now and I assure you Dorsey was a much, much better prospect than either of the two you mentioned. Your perception has been muddied due to the fact that Dorsey hasn't lived up to that billing, but he was far and away a better prospect than either Dareus or Fairley.

underrated29
04-25-2011, 08:37 PM
I'm more interested in him as a free safety then anything else.

If we were to draft him, i think he might end up there.

mattob14
04-25-2011, 08:38 PM
Youre barking up the wrong tree. In case you haven't noticed, this is a Denver Broncos themed message board. That means most people here have watched Champ Bailey's skills wasted for severa years because of a shoddy defensive line. During this time, we've also seen other defenses generate turnovers with lesser DBs because they have quality defensive lines. Its whats up font that matters most. If Dareus is better than Paea, you take Dareus. Defensive line has a bigger impact. You cant just give grades in a vacuum and pretend like theyre (ie DBs and DL) weighted equally. Theyre not.

This is exactly the type of thinking that leads to where this team is now. Daeus>Paea, so you HAVE to take Dareus? That line of logic is just awful. I'm not 100% sold on Peterson over Dareus, but if Elway and Co. rate Peterson as a once-in-a-generation type of CB, and Dareus as a 10 year starter at DT who will be solid, but unspectacular, you take Peterson, without hesitation. And if you really believe you have to take a DT, find a way to move back up for a Liuget, Austin, Paea, or Wilkerson, assuming it doesn't look like any of the 4 will be available at #36. Paea is the only one of that group who doesn't have a similar ceiling as Dareus, but he's also a pretty safe pick who would help that D-line.

Hamrob
04-25-2011, 08:40 PM
Carolina will take Dareus at #1.

We will either trade back...as teams jump to grab either Newton or Gabbert...or, we take Miller at 2.

If we trade back, our targets will be:

1. Peterson
2. Fairley

Peterson is a #2 CB to Bailey and a future FS. You don't draft a kid at #2, pay him $50m and then ask him to return kicks (in Denver?). He won't be our #2 pick.

If he's there at 5, 7, or 8, and we traded back to one of those positions...then, we will snatch him up.

OrangeSe7en
04-25-2011, 08:42 PM
You try to bring my perceptions into this conversation as an apparent flaw, but you're trying to say no one would take Dorsey over Dareus or Fairley? I've been following the draft avidly for almost 10 years now and I assure you Dorsey was a much, much better prospect than either of the two you mentioned. Your perception has been muddied due to the fact that Dorsey hasn't lived up to that billing, but he was far and away a better prospect than either Dareus or Fairley.

Im saying its not as matter of fact as you make it out to be. That draft it was the DT from USC and Dorsey who were the top drawer DTs. But then there was a steep drop off. In a deeper draft, teams are better able to wait or trade down for someone comparable, which should, in theory, devalue Dareus somewhat. But the fact that he's such a lock to go top 4 gives some indication of his quality as a DT in a deep DT class. There wasnt the same depth in Dorseys class and that, in theory, should have driven up his value except Dareus is still likely to go at roughly the same place as Dorsey. On that basis, I dont think you can just matter of factly say Dorsey was the better prospect.

OrangeSe7en
04-25-2011, 08:43 PM
This is exactly the type of thinking that leads to where this team is now. Daeus>Paea, so you HAVE to take Dareus? That line of logic is just awful. I'm not 100% sold on Peterson over Dareus, but if Elway and Co. rate Peterson as a once-in-a-generation type of CB, and Dareus as a 10 year starter at DT who will be solid, but unspectacular, you take Peterson, without hesitation. And if you really believe you have to take a DT, find a way to move back up for a Liuget, Austin, Paea, or Wilkerson, assuming it doesn't look like any of the 4 will be available at #36. Paea is the only one of that group who doesn't have a similar ceiling as Dareus, but he's also a pretty safe pick who would help that D-line.

That makes no sense. Back to front has been the mantra for several years.

maher_tyler
04-25-2011, 08:45 PM
It's a win win imo..either way..i'll be happy.

ICON
04-25-2011, 08:45 PM
Peterson's low low low Wonderlic scares the snot out of me. But I agree that the biggest single problem we have right now is at Safety. Ryan clady score was like 10,Jamarcus Russel got a 24..Im not really worried about it. There have been questions for a while about the relevance of Wonderlic tests. To me, its just like any other Combine number. It might matter, but watching tape and talking to the prospects is more importan

driver
04-25-2011, 08:50 PM
Peterson won't make a nickles worth of difference in our run defense.
If we can't at least try to improve our run D we should just forfeit next year and wait for the 2012 draft.

mattob14
04-25-2011, 08:52 PM
That makes no sense. Back to front has been the mantra for several years.

No, offense first has been the mantra. The defense as a whole has been neglected for years. If there were elite talents at both DT and CB this year, sure, take the DT. But without a McCoy or Suh available, it doesn't make sense to lock in on one position. Look, if you really believe that in 5 years Dareus will be the best player from this draft, then yes, take him. However, if a team scouts Dareus, Miller, and Peterson, determines Peterson is clearly superior to Dareus, but takes Marcel due to a positional need, it's a mistake, particularly at #2 overall. This isn't a team that is one player away and Dareus will push them over the top. The emphasis right now should be on accumulating talent and creatively utilizing that talent. Worry about locking in on positions as you get closer to contender status.

baja
04-25-2011, 08:54 PM
Deon Sanders scored a 7 and Asante Samuel scored a 10. Tebow didnt exactly light the Wonderlic up either.

Wow Deon Sanders scored a seven, obviously someone helped him.

Chris
04-25-2011, 08:56 PM
Wow Deon Sanders scored a seven, obviously someone helped him.

Before there was aderall, there was cocaine.

OrangeSe7en
04-25-2011, 08:57 PM
No, offense first has been the mantra. The defense as a whole has been neglected for years. If there were elite talents at both DT and CB this year, sure, take the DT. But without a McCoy or Suh available, it doesn't make sense to lock in on one position. Look, if you really believe that in 5 years Dareus will be the best player from this draft, then yes, take him. However, if a team scouts Dareus, Miller, and Peterson, determines Peterson is clearly superior to Dareus, but takes Marcel due to a positional need, it's a mistake, particularly at #2 overall. This isn't a team that is one player away and Dareus will push them over the top. The emphasis right now should be on accumulating talent and creatively utilizing that talent. Worry about locking in on positions as you get closer to contender status.

Im not even going to bother with an extensive response. You're wrong. The defense has been built back to front. Everyone knows this.

These discussions become really boring when people cant follow the bouncing ball. Theres really no point in discussing it with you when you subscribe to a lie just to fit some other view you have. Im just not up for that kind of contortionism.

NFLBRONCO
04-25-2011, 08:59 PM
Talent on defense is the goal. I dont care if its in the secondary, LB corps or along the line. If they fit what you want to do, get them.

:Broncos:

This is now I feel. We need studs on all levels of D.

TheReverend
04-25-2011, 09:01 PM
Im not even going to bother with an extensive response. You're wrong. The defense has been built back to front. Everyone knows this.

These discussions become really boring when people cant follow the bouncing ball. Theres really no point in discussing it with you when you subscribe to a lie just to fit some other view you have. Im just not up for that kind of contortionism.

Summary: You're taking the myopic, short-sighted "draft for need" approach and others are thes following the bouncing ball?

Lol

Dedhed
04-25-2011, 09:08 PM
Patrick Peterson and Stephen Paea is a much better 1-2 than a Marcell Dareus and someone like Brandon Harris.

By miles.

OrangeSe7en
04-25-2011, 09:10 PM
Summary: You're taking the myopic, short-sighted "draft for need" approach and others are thes following the bouncing ball?

Lol

Its not myopic or short-sighted. Its value focused. Deal with it.

Dedhed
04-25-2011, 09:10 PM
Peterson won't make a nickles worth of difference in our run defense.
If we can't at least try to improve our run D we should just forfeit next year and wait for the 2012 draft.

So you don't think having an extra guy in the box would make a difference in the run game?

Dedhed
04-25-2011, 09:13 PM
Its not myopic or short-sighted. Its value focused.

Actually its the opposite. Would you rather pay $100 for something worth $100, or pay $100 for something worth $80?

You're saying you'd rather pay $100 for $80 in value because you like it better, but that doesn't make it worth $100.

That's not value focus.

OrangeSe7en
04-25-2011, 09:15 PM
Actually its the opposite. Would you rather pay $100 for something worth $100, or pay $100 for something worth $80?

You're saying you'd rather pay $100 for $80 in value because you like it better, but that doesn't make it worth $100.

That's not value focus.

You have no clue what you're talking about so just move along.

Chris
04-25-2011, 09:21 PM
Honestly I want Miller or Fairley (in his case at 5).

Dedhed
04-25-2011, 09:22 PM
You have no clue what you're talking about so just move along.

I'm sure you've ASSumed that about many people in your life who you can't keep up with.

OrangeSe7en
04-25-2011, 09:24 PM
I'm sure you've ASSumed that about many people in your life who you can't keep up with.

Sorry but the mystery of you possibly being some genius was ruined by you're stupid scenario.

Sorry, bro. You're not fooling anyone.

Chris
04-25-2011, 09:24 PM
I'm sure you've ASSumed that about many people in your life who you can't keep up with.

Saw what you did dere ;)

listopencil
04-25-2011, 09:27 PM
Patrick Peterson and Stephen Paea is a much better 1-2 than a Marcell Dareus and someone like Brandon Harris.



Hmmm...not bad.

KevinJames
04-25-2011, 09:30 PM
http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Patrick-Peterson1.jpg


OMG forget a Tebowner I got a PETERSON!!!!!

i don't care if that dont make no sense we need to draft Peterson!

Chris
04-25-2011, 09:31 PM
The very fact that we're picking specific guys with our 2A pick is reason for concern. There is no guarantee we get anyone so you better be prepared to have an alternative to Paea and an alternative to that guy if he gets drafted. Very possible we end up with someone we didn't rate that highly because we need DT there.

TheReverend
04-25-2011, 09:32 PM
Sorry but the mystery of you possibly being some genius was ruined by you're stupid scenario.

Sorry, bro. You're not fooling anyone.

Why am I not surprised in the least?

Love personal intelligence attacks that come in broken English.

TheReverend
04-25-2011, 09:33 PM
The very fact that we're picking specific guys with our 2A pick is reason for concern. There is no guarantee we get anyone so you better be prepared to have an alternative to Paea and an alternative to that guy if he gets drafted. Very possible we end up with someone we didn't rate that highly because we need DT there.

That's precisely why you do your due diligence with a draft board and not a 20 name index card like Xanders 2008.

rugbythug
04-25-2011, 09:35 PM
My guess is they are sold on Austin if they take peterson. Hope they are right.

Hulamau
04-25-2011, 09:36 PM
Patrick Peterson and Stephen Paea is a much better 1-2 than a Marcell Dareus and someone like Brandon Harris.

BINGO!

broncswin
04-25-2011, 09:36 PM
there is nothing wrong with peterson at number 5 or right around there in a trade down, if we can pick up an extra number 2...then we are set up nicely in the 2nd round with three picks...anyone thinking that would be terrible is so stuck on their own idea they are too blind to see the light.

OrangeSe7en
04-25-2011, 09:38 PM
Why am I not surprised in the least?

Love personal intelligence attacks that come in broken English.

I know thats wrong. Im not sure what it proves though other than its late and I don't proofread. I know it should have been "your" though. Have a cookie.

Chris
04-25-2011, 09:39 PM
there is nothing wrong with peterson at number 5 or right around there in a trade down, if we can pick up an extra number 2...then we are set up nicely in the 2nd round with three picks...anyone thinking that would be terrible is so stuck on their own idea they are too blind to see the light.

The anti-Patrick Peterson theme song

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Eg8cDmi7-U8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

OrangeSe7en
04-25-2011, 09:41 PM
The anti-Patrick Peterson theme song

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Eg8cDmi7-U8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I think a lot of the people who are on the Peterson bandwagon have homosexual tendencies. What these people need to realize is that picking football players isnt like looking for a "partner" while hanging out at the beach. They need to realize the fat guys are good too even if they dont look as good in jeans as DBs.

TheReverend
04-25-2011, 09:42 PM
I think a lot of the people who are on the Peterson bandwagon have homosexual tendencies. What these people need to realize is that picking football players isnt like looking for a "partner" while hanging out at the beach. They need to realize the fat guys are good too even if they dont look as good in jeans as DBs.

http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0/1/6/7/2/4/7/1/jesus-facepalm-15946113922.jpeg

Lev Vyvanse
04-25-2011, 09:44 PM
I know thats wrong. Im not sure what it proves though other than its late and I don't proofread. I know it should have been "your" though. Have a cookie.

I think he is referring to glass houses. I'm sure you're mom can fill you in.

I know it's your

Agamemnon
04-25-2011, 09:46 PM
God I hope we trade down rather than take a corner at #2. The very thought makes me nauseous.

OrangeSe7en
04-25-2011, 09:47 PM
I think he is referring to glass houses. I'm sure you're mom can fill you in.

I know it's your

That would make sense, except the two arent the same at all. I misused "youre" which has nothing to do with reasoning or thought process. What this was really about is the fact that I zinged him on the previous page and this guy is so desperate to try to zing me back, that he was willing to go with a grammar comment, which was weak and not really even apples to apples.


And besides that, he's probably homo.

TheReverend
04-25-2011, 09:48 PM
God I hope we trade down rather than take a corner at #2. The very thought makes me nauseous.

Nauseous?

Take two of these and call me in the morning:

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/S1oqIK9cMTY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Agamemnon
04-25-2011, 09:49 PM
there is nothing wrong with peterson at number 5 or right around there in a trade down, if we can pick up an extra number 2...then we are set up nicely in the 2nd round with three picks...anyone thinking that would be terrible is so stuck on their own idea they are too blind to see the light.

I could live with Peterson at #5. No corner is worth the #2 pick though.

Kaylore
04-25-2011, 09:52 PM
As well they should be. Two DB coaches know special when they see it.

This is an excellent point. A DB head coach and DC? That definitely has to factor.

Lev Vyvanse
04-25-2011, 09:53 PM
That would make sense, except the two arent the same at all. I misused "youre" which has nothing to do with reasoning or thought process. What this was really about is the fact that I zinged him on the previous page and this guy is so desperate to try to zing me back, that he was willing to go with a grammar comment, which was weak and not really even apples to apples.

I have been back on the mane for about 4 hours. In that time I've only learned one thing. I've learned that you can't zing anyone.

OrangeSe7en
04-25-2011, 09:54 PM
I have been back on the mane for about 4 hours. In that time I've only learn one thing. I've learned that you can't zing anyone.

Ive learned that he has a couple of mascots that wear skirts. You might want to shave your legs.

Agamemnon
04-25-2011, 09:55 PM
Nauseous?

Take two of these and call me in the morning:

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/S1oqIK9cMTY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

He's a corner. He isn't going to fix what's wrong with our defense, and his positional value isn't worth the #2 pick. So yes the thought makes me nauseous.

I've spent the better part of a decade watching one of the greatest corners to ever play playing on consistently bad to absolutely terrible defenses. As great as Champ has been, our terrible d-line has kept it from really mattering. Great corners are not the foundation of great defenses. Great d-linemen are.

TheReverend
04-25-2011, 09:55 PM
That would make sense, except the two arent the same at all. I misused "youre" which has nothing to do with reasoning or thought process. What this was really about is the fact that I zinged him on the previous page and this guy is so desperate to try to zing me back, that he was willing to go with a grammar comment, which was weak and not really even apples to apples.


And besides that, he's probably homo.

...that was a zing?

Because it looked like you being childish trying to change the subject after you had no clue what a "deep draft" means.

Lev Vyvanse
04-25-2011, 09:56 PM
Ive learned that he has a couple of mascots that wear skirts. You might want to shave your legs.

What now?

OrangeSe7en
04-25-2011, 09:57 PM
...that was a zing?

Because it looked like you being childish trying to change the subject after you had no clue what a "deep draft" means.

Yeah, you were zinged. Big time! But speaking of childish. Im not sure if all the Peterson photos are more childish or gay.

TheReverend
04-25-2011, 09:58 PM
This is an excellent point. A DB head coach and DC? That definitely has to factor.

Both have coached some fantastic HoF'ers that are also physically imposing DBs (Woodson with Fox, Sharper with Allen). Both made MASSIVE impacts to their teams (Superbowls, in fact)

Dedhed
04-25-2011, 09:59 PM
Sorry but the mystery of you possibly being some genius was ruined by you're stupid scenario.

Sorry, bro. You're not fooling anyone.
Sorry Bro, but I didn't post a scenario at all. What I posted was an analogy pointing to you're malformed notion that your opinion was "value focused". Your not following.

PS-I've misused every your and you're in this post just for you. Consider it you're cookie.

TheReverend
04-25-2011, 10:00 PM
Yeah, you were zinged. Big time! But speaking of childish. Im not sure if all the Peterson photos are more childish or gay.

....................

And that would mean more if this was a great CB class. But its not. On the other hand, its supposed to be a strong DT class. And so on that basis, Peterson is going to make a lot of pro bowls while Dareus or Fairley wont.

Whatevs.

I'm not sure you understand what a "deep class" means...

Im not sure you understand what "understand" means. But thats OK. Its not like I asked you anything.

Boy, you really got me good...

OrangeSe7en
04-25-2011, 10:01 PM
Sorry Bro, but I didn't post a scenario at all. What I posted was an analogy pointing to you're malformed notion that your opinion was "value focused". Your not following.

PS-I've misused every your and you're in this post just for you. Consider it you're cookie.

Whatever, dude. Youre not some mystery genius and you're in the rearview mirror. Thanks for chiming in though.

NFLBRONCO
04-25-2011, 10:01 PM
First off I'd be happy with any of the three at 2. I'd take Peterson if it was me though.

Chris
04-25-2011, 10:01 PM
http://www.teesforall.com/images/Care_Bears_Hug_Navy_Shirt.jpg

Lev Vyvanse
04-25-2011, 10:02 PM
....................







Boy, you really got me good...

Did MVP change his name?

OrangeSe7en
04-25-2011, 10:03 PM
....................







Boy, you really got me good...

Yeah, I did. And btw, you are one raging Patrick Peterson homo. You might want to find help for this fixation of yours (not a zing, just helpful advice...because I care).

OrangeSe7en
04-25-2011, 10:04 PM
First off I'd be happy with any of the three at 2. I think you should go nicest ass in jeans though and that's Peterson.

fixed

Dedhed
04-25-2011, 10:05 PM
I could live with Peterson at #5. No corner is worth the #2 pick though.
Redo the 2007 draft today, and name 2 guys who go ahead of Revis.

baja
04-25-2011, 10:06 PM
Actually its the opposite. Would you rather pay $100 for something worth $100, or pay $100 for something worth $80?

You're saying you'd rather pay $100 for $80 in value because you like it better, but that doesn't make it worth $100.

That's not value focus.

If you were in the middle of Manhattan with a hundred dollars in your bock pocket, someone offers you a gallon of spring water for the hundred bucks and another guy is in a bind so he offers you a Rolex for the $100. Clearly you take the Rolex.


But let's say you are in a desert without any water and you get the same 2 offers, this time you take the water without a seconds hesitation.

As for the draft, you gotta consider the situation you are acquiring the guy to help you with too.

baja
04-25-2011, 10:09 PM
If I had my drathers I't take Peterson and play him like Troy P. If he could do that it would be the single biggest boost the D could hope for from one guy.

OrangeSe7en
04-25-2011, 10:11 PM
If I had my drathers I't take Peterson and play him like Troy P. If he could do that it would be the single biggest boost the D could hope for from one guy.

Pittsburgh has a better front 7 than Denver and probably the best DC in the game and scheming pressure.

Dedhed
04-25-2011, 10:12 PM
Whatever, dude. Youre not some mystery genius and you're in the rearview mirror. Thanks for chiming in though.

Are you sure that isn't "your" in the rear view? You're a weak minded little bigot, I'm not concerned.

Shananahan
04-25-2011, 10:12 PM
If we do draft Peterson, can we have the mods change the avatars for OrangeSe7en and bronco0608 to pictures of him?

Dedhed
04-25-2011, 10:18 PM
If you were in the middle of Manhattan with a hundred dollars in your bock pocket, someone offers you a gallon of spring water for the hundred bucks and another guy is in a bind so he offers you a Rolex for the $100. Clearly you take the Rolex.


But let's say you are in a desert without any water and you get the same 2 offers, this time you take the water without a seconds hesitation.

As for the draft, you gotta consider the situation you are acquiring the guy to help you with too.
Let's say instead that you were looking to build a football defense and you had needs at every position. Would you take the best talent or base it on position?

Agamemnon
04-25-2011, 10:18 PM
Redo the 2007 draft today, and name 2 guys who go ahead of Revis.

I'd take Calvin Johnson, Adrian Peterson, Patrick Willis, or Joe Thomas over him in an instant. I wouldn't even give it a thought. Then again I don't buy into the Revis hype.

Agamemnon
04-25-2011, 10:19 PM
Let's say instead that you were looking to build a football defense and you had needs at every position. Would you take the best talent or base it on position?

We don't have needs at every position. Certainly not to the same degree anyway. We don't need a corner anywhere as much as we need d-line and linebackers.

Dedhed
04-25-2011, 10:25 PM
I'd take Calvin Johnson, Adrian Peterson, Patrick Willis, or Joe Thomas over him in an instant. I wouldn't even give it a thought. Then again I don't buy into the Revis hype.

I might take Willis, but CJ, Thomas aren't even close. Peterson is a draw in my eyes given that he's already on the decline. If you think Revis is hype, I don't think you've actually watched him play, but just fancy yourself a contrarian.

Try 1999 with Champ.

baja
04-25-2011, 10:26 PM
Let's say instead that you were looking to build a football defense and you had needs at every position. Would you take the best talent or base it on position?

Given that we suck so bad on defense I'd take the guy that I could build a team around and to me that guy is Peterson at FS.

I was just taking issue with the way you defined value abstractly.

Dedhed
04-25-2011, 10:28 PM
We don't have needs at every position. Certainly not to the same degree anyway. We don't need a corner anywhere as much as we need d-line and linebackers.
Teams need playmakers. Given that Doom is really our only playmaker on defense at this point, we have needs at every other position.

Dedhed
04-25-2011, 10:31 PM
I was just taking issue with the way you defined value abstractly.

It's no more abstract, in my eyes, than saying a DT has more value to a team than a CB.

Lev Vyvanse
04-25-2011, 10:32 PM
I might take Willis, but CJ, Thomas aren't even close. Peterson is a draw in my eyes given that he's already on the decline. If you think Revis is hype, I don't think you've actually watched him play, but just fancy yourself a contrarian.

Try 1999 with Champ.

Do the 1989 draft. So you don't need OT or QB who do you pick?

TheReverend
04-25-2011, 10:34 PM
It's no more abstract, in my eyes, than saying a DT has more value to a team than a CB.

15-20 snaps per game > 40-50?

The logic makes no sense... and NFL payrolls prove it.

Agamemnon
04-25-2011, 10:34 PM
I might take Willis, but CJ, Thomas aren't even close. Peterson is a draw in my eyes given that he's already on the decline. If you think Revis is hype, I don't think you've actually watched him play, but just fancy yourself a contrarian.

Try 1999 with Champ.

Joe Thomas is a dominant all-pro LT. Calvin Johnson is a dominant WR that has underproduced due instability at QB (though he's more than shown he's one of the best in the league on a play-by-play basis). Meanwhile Revis is a really good corner that plays behind a dominant front seven and gets far more praise than he deserves. I've watched him play plenty. In my estimation he's overrated. Keep in mind though that that doesn't mean I don't think he's one of the best in the league--it just means I don't think he's the cornerback god that the media makes him out to be.

TheReverend
04-25-2011, 10:39 PM
Joe Thomas is a dominant all-pro LT. Calvin Johnson is a dominant WR that has underproduced due instability at QB (though he's more than shown he's one of the best in the league on a play-by-play basis). Meanwhile Revis is a really good corner that plays behind a dominant front seven and gets far more praise than he deserves. I've watched him play plenty. In my estimation he's overrated. Keep in mind though that that doesn't mean I don't think he's one of the best in the league--it just means I don't think he's the cornerback god that the media makes him out to be.

Revis allows the front seven to be dominant. None of them are worth a **** as pass rushers... thats why their leading sacker had SIX and only THREE players had 5 or more (5, 5.5, and 6).

They're able to blitz so creative and effectively BECAUSE of solid coverage on the back end.

But hey, why take my word for it when you can take Rex's:

Quite honestly, hes the best player in football, Ryan said, in comments distributed by the team. That is what you saw out there. Hold Reggie Wayne, who led the league in catches, I think he had 111 catches, to one catch for one yard. That tells you how good Darrelle Revis is. I know hes probably not going to win the Defensive Player of the Year award, but the impact he has is amazing. We were able to do some coverages during the game where we actually played man-coverage strictly on his side regardless of who the receiver was and roll their coverage away from it. You only do that if you have Darrelle Revis. Hes an amazing once-in-a-life-time player and we took advantage of him.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/01/10/rex-ryan-darrelle-revis-is-the-best-player-in-the-nfl/

Agamemnon
04-25-2011, 10:39 PM
15-20 snaps per game > 40-50?

The logic makes no sense... and NFL payrolls prove it.

1. Not all DTs are rotational players. Not sure where you got that idea.

2. NFL payrolls prove nothing. By your logic the rookie contracts of recent years prove that high 1st round picks are better than all-pro vet starters...

Agamemnon
04-25-2011, 10:41 PM
Revis allows the front seven to be dominant. None of them are worth a **** as pass rushers... thats why their leading sacker had SIX and only THREE players had 5 or more (5, 5.5, and 6).

They're able to blitz so creative and effectively BECAUSE of solid coverage on the back end.

But hey, why take my word for it when you can take Rex's:

Quite honestly, hes the best player in football, Ryan said, in comments distributed by the team. That is what you saw out there. Hold Reggie Wayne, who led the league in catches, I think he had 111 catches, to one catch for one yard. That tells you how good Darrelle Revis is. I know hes probably not going to win the Defensive Player of the Year award, but the impact he has is amazing. We were able to do some coverages during the game where we actually played man-coverage strictly on his side regardless of who the receiver was and roll their coverage away from it. You only do that if you have Darrelle Revis. Hes an amazing once-in-a-life-time player and we took advantage of him.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/01/10/rex-ryan-darrelle-revis-is-the-best-player-in-the-nfl/

Did you just quote that walking blob of hyperbole hyping up his own star player? Do you really expect anyone to take that seriously? Hilarious!

TheReverend
04-25-2011, 10:43 PM
Did you just quote that walking blob of hyperbole hyping up his own star player? Do you really expect anyone to take that seriously? Hilarious!

...well you could either:

A) Argue the merits of what I said and what he said.

or

B) Trash talk one of the best defensive minds in football.

Nice to see you went with B... "Star player"? In the secondary? How could their front 7 ever be "dominant" as you described it with the "star player" in the secondary?

(see what I did there?)

Dedhed
04-25-2011, 10:47 PM
Joe Thomas is a dominant all-pro LT. Calvin Johnson is a dominant WR that has underproduced due instability at QB (though he's more than shown he's one of the best in the league on a play-by-play basis). Meanwhile Revis is a really good corner that plays behind a dominant front seven and gets far more praise than he deserves. I've watched him play plenty. In my estimation he's overrated. Keep in mind though that that doesn't mean I don't think he's one of the best in the league--it just means I don't think he's the cornerback god that the media makes him out to be.

Thanks, but I'll take his coach's word over yours. And "Dominant" is a stretch for the jets front 7. They struggled significantly when Revis was injured.

Lev Vyvanse
04-25-2011, 10:48 PM
1. Not all DTs are rotational players. Not sure where you got that idea.

2. NFL payrolls prove nothing. By your logic the rookie contracts of recent years prove that high 1st round picks are better than all-pro vet starters...

1. Yes they are. Every single one of them.

2. So...I don't even....you know that rookie contracts are dependent on the rookie cap right? And your example is young vs old as opposed to CB vs DT.

Dedhed
04-25-2011, 10:48 PM
Did you just quote that walking blob of hyperbole hyping up his own star player? Do you really expect anyone to take that seriously? Hilarious!

Why would he hype Revis over other players on his team? To drive the price up?

Dedhed
04-25-2011, 10:50 PM
1. Not all DTs are rotational players. Not sure where you got that idea.um...Fail

2. NFL payrolls prove nothing. By your logic the rookie contracts of recent years prove that high 1st round picks are better than all-pro vet starters...
That's not the logic being used at all.

Agamemnon
04-25-2011, 10:52 PM
1. Yes they are. Every single one of them.

2. So...I don't even....you know that rookie contracts are dependent on the rookie cap right? And your example is young vs old as opposed to CB vs DT.

1. Say what? Most top-tier DTs play on 80-90% of their team's snaps.

2. I think you missed my point. And there is no rookie cap yet.

Agamemnon
04-25-2011, 10:55 PM
um...Fail

And so our discussion dies the death of so many on the internet: eaten by a troll...

Lev Vyvanse
04-25-2011, 10:58 PM
1. Say what? Most top-tier DTs play on 80-90% of their team's snaps.

2. I think you missed my point. And there is no rookie cap yet.

There is no rookie cap?
http://i564.photobucket.com/albums/ss87/Bids99/tomcruiselaugh.gif

Hulamau
04-25-2011, 11:03 PM
I could live with Peterson at #5. No corner is worth the #2 pick though.

Tell me do you think Woodson or Prime would have been worth a 2nd in hindsight??? ... I do!!

If you are just thinking generic DB, I agree with you. Peterson is worth the chance he's gonna be a rare truly special player. In which case we'd all be kicking ourselves if we went for a 6 to 7 year good DT and missed out on a new legend. Particularly since we can in all likelihood get one or more solid Dlinemen in round 2!

No guarantees here, but I'll trust the instincts of Elway, Fox, Xander and no doubt some input from Allen as well.

Dedhed
04-25-2011, 11:07 PM
And so our discussion dies the death of so many on the internet: eaten by a troll...

Is there another appropriate response to an outright falsehood? Or were you referring to yourself as the troll for propping an argument on the outright falsehood?

Agamemnon
04-25-2011, 11:08 PM
Tell me do you think Woodson or Prime would have been worth a 2nd in hindsight??? ... I do!!

If you are just thinking generic DB, I agree with you. Peterson is worth the chance he's gonna be a rare truly special player. In which case we'd all be kicking ourselves if we went for a 6 to 7 year good DT and missed out on a new legend. Particularly since we can in all likelihood get one or more solid Dlinemen in round 2!

No guarantees here, but I'll trust the instincts of Elway, Fox, Xander and no doubt some input from Allen as well.

The problem is that we've had an all-time great CB for some time now and it just doesn't matter without a good front seven. Not sure why that's so hard to see for some...

Lev Vyvanse
04-25-2011, 11:10 PM
The problem is that we've had an all-time great CB for some time now and it just doesn't matter without a good front seven. Not sure why that's so hard to see for some...

2007

Agamemnon
04-25-2011, 11:11 PM
Is there another appropriate response to an outright falsehood?

How about providing some kind of proof that it's an outright falsehood. There are plenty of DTs that are full-time players. Yes many are rotational, but elite DTs often stay on the field a lot.

Dedhed
04-25-2011, 11:11 PM
The problem is that we've had an all-time great CB for some time now and it just doesn't matter without a good front seven. Not sure why that's so hard to see for some...It's not hard to see if you don't consider for a second how much worse this defense would be without him and that he nearly single-handedly dragged this team as close to the SB as they've been post Elway.

If you ignore all that it's easy to say something as naive as "Champ doesn't matter".

Agamemnon
04-25-2011, 11:12 PM
2007

Champ at his peak >>>> Revis so far...

Lev Vyvanse
04-25-2011, 11:14 PM
Champ at his peak >>>> Revis so far...

The draft numbnuts.

Dedhed
04-25-2011, 11:14 PM
How about providing some kind of proof that it's an outright falsehood. There are plenty of DTs that are full-time players. Yes many are rotational, but elite DTs often stay on the field a lot.

Are you really going to be dumb enough to try and argue that there are DTs who don't play in a constant rotation? Because if you are, you're about to get laughed out of the building.

Agamemnon
04-25-2011, 11:19 PM
It's not hard to see if you don't consider for a second how much worse this defense would be without him and that he nearly single-handedly dragged this team as close to the SB as they've been post Elway.

If you ignore all that it's easy to say something as naive as "Champ doesn't matter".

I didn't say Champ doesn't matter. He's mad some great plays that have won us games. But at the same time we've had some of the worst defenses in NFL history with him on the field. Sure they would've been even worse without him, but that isn't the point. The point is that a shutdown corner can only shutdown one guy at a time, and if you have a garbage line and no pass rush the offense will just find someone else to throw to. How many times have we been torn up by and opposing QB and yet managed to hold his #1 WR to nearly nothing? I'd hate to know the actual number because it would probably depress me.

Unfortunately an elite corner only really comes into their own on a good defense. Then they can often be the factor that takes their team over the top. But on a bottom feeder defense it's just too easy to minimize their impact, especially for elite QBs that aren't prone to forcing stupid passes.

NFLBRONCO
04-25-2011, 11:22 PM
The problem is that we've had an all-time great CB for some time now and it just doesn't matter without a good front seven. Not sure why that's so hard to see for some...

I think to get where you (we) want is add major talent to all levels of D regardless what order. Adding Dareus is biggest need but, him alone is 1 of 6 pieces needed. Same with Peterson and Miller its just 1 of 6 pieces. I wish we could land Dareus, Miller and Peterson that would get us better faster.


I think the pick will show me fast if John is a bold BPA type drafter or a need or safe drafter like we have drafted like forever.


Bold: Drafting Peterson
Need: Drafting: Dareus
Safe: Drafting Miller

Agamemnon
04-25-2011, 11:40 PM
Are you really going to be dumb enough to try and argue that there are DTs who don't play in a constant rotation? Because if you are, you're about to get laughed out of the building.

What is a constant rotation to you? You said that a DT we drafted would play 15-20 plays a game as I recall. And that's absolutely absurd. Now if by rotation you mean they get spelled here or there, sure. But top-tier DTs in 4-3 defenses (to exclude 3-4 NTs which are a very different animal) play the vast majority of snaps.

Agamemnon
04-25-2011, 11:42 PM
I think to get where you (we) want is add major talent to all levels of D regardless what order. Adding Dareus is biggest need but, him alone is 1 of 6 pieces needed. Same with Peterson and Miller its just 1 of 6 pieces. I wish we could land Dareus, Miller and Peterson that would get us better faster.


I think the pick will show me fast if John is a bold BPA type drafter or a need or safe drafter like we have drafted like forever.


Bold: Drafting Peterson
Need: Drafting: Dareus
Safe: Drafting Miller

There's nothing bold about drafting Peterson. It would just show a lack of understanding regarding how to build a defense. Drafting a corner in our situation would be like building a house by starting on the roof.

Agamemnon
04-25-2011, 11:46 PM
There is no rookie cap?
http://i564.photobucket.com/albums/ss87/Bids99/tomcruiselaugh.gif

Not yet there isn't. Which is why Eric Berry was the highest paid safety in the league last year as a rookie.

EDIT: Looking it up, there is a rookie cap, but it wasn't what I was thinking of. Namely a hard limit to what rookies can be paid. Instead it's some abstract cap number that seems to have no real impact on things and might as well not even exist.

NFLBRONCO
04-25-2011, 11:51 PM
There's nothing bold about drafting Peterson. It would just show a lack of understanding regarding how to build a defense. Drafting a corner in our situation would be like building a house by starting on the roof.

Drafting well throughout the draft is how build a D. I'd like Denver to try and think outside the box for awhile.

yerner
04-25-2011, 11:51 PM
There's nothing bold about drafting Peterson. It would just show a lack of understanding regarding how to build a defense. Drafting a corner in our situation would be like building a house by starting on the roof.

yeah. that's a exactly what it would be like. nice house analogy.

NFLBRONCO
04-25-2011, 11:56 PM
There's nothing bold about drafting Peterson. It would just show a lack of understanding regarding how to build a defense. Drafting a corner in our situation would be like building a house by starting on the roof.


I just want the player that turns out to be the best of the three more then what piece is more important building a D.

Agamemnon
04-26-2011, 12:00 AM
Drafting well throughout the draft is how build a D. I'd like Denver to try and think outside the box for awhile.

Sure it is. Also understanding that certain positions are more important than others and prioritizing accordingly is key. In a 4-3 defense positional value would follow something like this (roughly):

RDE > DT> MLB > CB > LDE > WOLB > S > SOLB

Which is why a pure BPA doesn't work. Each position is not inherently equal.

Agamemnon
04-26-2011, 12:03 AM
I just want the player that turns out to be the best of the three more then what piece is more important building a D.

And I don't want us to take a player at a position that doesn't help us, especially not at #2. Though the more that I look at this draft the more I begin to think we have to trade down to really get the right player at the right position for the right cost. If we stay at #2 I just don't like any of our options all that much.

NUB
04-26-2011, 12:11 AM
I think you guys are being paralyzed by the numerous choices Denver has. Nobody should be really unhappy if any of the top recognized defensive players are taken (primarily, Dareus, Fairely, Miller and Peterson) at #2.

Broncos_OTM
04-26-2011, 12:21 AM
...well you could either:

A) Argue the merits of what I said and what he said.

or

B) Trash talk one of the best defensive minds in football.

Nice to see you went with B... "Star player"? In the secondary? How could their front 7 ever be "dominant" as you described it with the "star player" in the secondary?

(see what I did there?)he has a point.. nice deflect

ol#7
04-26-2011, 12:30 AM
The trouble with Peterson is, the league has moved to so favor the passing game that a guy like him has alredy had his hands tied before ever takign the field. No way a Rod Woodson or Ronnie Lott could have the same impact today. The only way you slow down todays passing game is to get constant pressure on the QB's, something that Denver has no ability to do outside of doom who is coming off an injury. If they trade back and take Peterson (knowing that the extra pick can also fill a hole) then fine, but not at #2.

NFLBRONCO
04-26-2011, 12:35 AM
I think its funny DT is biggest need but, I see more articles about Peterson or Miller now.

Shananahan
04-26-2011, 12:48 AM
Nobody should be really unhappy if any of the top recognized defensive players are taken (primarily, Dareus, Fairely, Miller and Peterson) at #2.
Yeah. I don't know how much longer I can take threads like this that just devolve into endless petty bitching and quibbling. There are a couple people on this board who, based on their recent posts regarding the draft, must be joyless, pathetic and insufferable people in real life.

LongDongJohnson
04-26-2011, 01:08 AM
At number 2 you have to go with BPA in my opinion. Who has a better chance of being a pro bowler? Dareus or Peterson? What about Von Miller? Im not sold on Dareus. DT's have a very high bust potential. We cant afford to miss on this pick. I want Denver to get Miller or Peterson. I think those 2 will be probowlers for sure in this league. If had a choice id go with Miller.

Shananahan
04-26-2011, 01:10 AM
I'm sold on Dareus. I'm also sold on Peterson. Miller will probably be a good player but his lack of experience at the position along with his fit into whatever scheme we'll be running make me wonder why people are so ready to jump on him at #2. I'd still prefer to trade down if possible and accumulate more picks, but as long as we walk away with a top ten defensive talent and make the most of the selection I will surely get excited about it.

i4jelway7
04-26-2011, 03:35 AM
He's a corner. He isn't going to fix what's wrong with our defense, and his positional value isn't worth the #2 pick. So yes the thought makes me nauseous.

I've spent the better part of a decade watching one of the greatest corners to ever play playing on consistently bad to absolutely terrible defenses. As great as Champ has been, our terrible d-line has kept it from really mattering. Great corners are not the foundation of great defenses. Great d-linemen are.

Amen brother.. Amen

Cleo McDowell
04-26-2011, 03:41 AM
If we do draft Peterson, can we have the mods change the avatars for OrangeSe7en and bronco0608 to pictures of him?

Aren't they the same person? I always thought 0608 switched to se7en when she took too much of an ass ramming.

Rabb
04-26-2011, 05:22 AM
At number 2 you have to go with BPA in my opinion. Who has a better chance of being a pro bowler? Dareus or Peterson? What about Von Miller? Im not sold on Dareus. DT's have a very high bust potential. We cant afford to miss on this pick. I want Denver to get Miller or Peterson. I think those 2 will be probowlers for sure in this league. If had a choice id go with Miller.

I am a PP guy, but I completely agree with you. It's so maddening to read the "but but, we had Champ and look what that got us!"

that's great, we also have many other picks in a deep DT draft with 2 in great 2nd round spots that we can use on the line

passing on the BPA for a need at this high of a spot is a mistake, IMO but it won't matter...we will take Dareus I bet and then we just move on one way or another

I can live with Miller, Dareus or PP

OrangeSe7en
04-26-2011, 05:49 AM
The trouble with Peterson is, the league has moved to so favor the passing game that a guy like him has alredy had his hands tied before ever takign the field. No way a Rod Woodson or Ronnie Lott could have the same impact today. The only way you slow down todays passing game is to get constant pressure on the QB's, something that Denver has no ability to do outside of doom who is coming off an injury. If they trade back and take Peterson (knowing that the extra pick can also fill a hole) then fine, but not at #2.

This is one of the best posts in this thread and not one response to it. What a shock. There are plenty of pictures of Peterson in the rain though.

alkemical
04-26-2011, 06:02 AM
Tell me do you think Woodson or Prime would have been worth a 2nd in hindsight??? ... I do!!

If you are just thinking generic DB, I agree with you. Peterson is worth the chance he's gonna be a rare truly special player. In which case we'd all be kicking ourselves if we went for a 6 to 7 year good DT and missed out on a new legend. Particularly since we can in all likelihood get one or more solid Dlinemen in round 2!

No guarantees here, but I'll trust the instincts of Elway, Fox, Xander and no doubt some input from Allen as well.


Not only that, but even Champ was drafted, what 7th?

I'd take the BPA approach. If it's Peterson, roll with it.

tsiguy96
04-26-2011, 06:06 AM
i used to think trading down was the way to go, but at this point, id rather get quality players instead of quantity. we need a superstar on D, not just 3 more guys.

alkemical
04-26-2011, 06:10 AM
I didn't say Champ doesn't matter. He's mad some great plays that have won us games. But at the same time we've had some of the worst defenses in NFL history with him on the field. Sure they would've been even worse without him, but that isn't the point. The point is that a shutdown corner can only shutdown one guy at a time, and if you have a garbage line and no pass rush the offense will just find someone else to throw to. How many times have we been torn up by and opposing QB and yet managed to hold his #1 WR to nearly nothing? I'd hate to know the actual number because it would probably depress me.

Unfortunately an elite corner only really comes into their own on a good defense. Then they can often be the factor that takes their team over the top. But on a bottom feeder defense it's just too easy to minimize their impact, especially for elite QBs that aren't prone to forcing stupid passes.


You need to have a stud at each level of the team. I'd go with the BPA approach. If it's Peterson, you take him. You have just as much a need with this D at every position.

Also, you want to talk about a learning curve. How many rookie DT's have success. If you want to instantly increase the talent, right away - you're better off going with a FA.

alkemical
04-26-2011, 06:14 AM
i used to think trading down was the way to go, but at this point, id rather get quality players instead of quantity. we need a superstar on D, not just 3 more guys.

We can do that with FA as well. We can get role players that fit the needs of the scheme. A rookie won't have an immediate impact, so you have to plan for a two years or so.

tsiguy96
04-26-2011, 06:19 AM
We can do that with FA as well. We can get role players that fit the needs of the scheme. A rookie won't have an immediate impact, so you have to plan for a two years or so.

this team has tried to fix through FA for way too long, is there any REAL success story they have to show for it? dre bly, niko, jamal williams?

rookies have immediate impacts all the time, especially if put in the right situation. this team needs to aim for quality players in the draft, not quantity.

Rabb
04-26-2011, 06:21 AM
We can do that with FA as well. We can get role players that fit the needs of the scheme. A rookie won't have an immediate impact, so you have to plan for a two years or so.

for some roles yeah but I am tired of seeing this team try and build through FA, the good teams don't

the BPA approach is a long-term one, so most people don't like it and it's hard to realize the truth that we have such a mess here in Denver, this won't be a one year turnaround

driver
04-26-2011, 06:31 AM
So you don't think having an extra guy in the box would make a difference in the run game?

So you're going to take the best corner in the draft and make a safety out of him?
This whole discussion is about draft philosophy BPA vs. NEED when you get down to it.
Is Peterson the BPA, I don't think so, Green may be, why don't we take HIM?
By saying draft Peterson you're saying take the BPA at a position of need.
If you're going to draft for need take care of the real problem, the D line, is Dareus the best DT, I don't know. IMO Fairley and Liuget, and Paea are all right there with him. Austin from NC is just a step below them. He scares me though because of the off the field problems.

We have a great big need, There is a great big hole in the middle of our defense, we can't stop anyone's running game.

I'm sick of watching my team get smashed in the mouth on every down
fix the problem.

alkemical
04-26-2011, 06:32 AM
this team has tried to fix through FA for way too long, is there any REAL success story they have to show for it? dre bly, niko, jamal williams?

rookies have immediate impacts all the time, especially if put in the right situation. this team needs to aim for quality players in the draft, not quantity.


for some roles yeah but I am tired of seeing this team try and build through FA, the good teams don't

the BPA approach is a long-term one, so most people don't like it and it's hard to realize the truth that we have such a mess here in Denver, this won't be a one year turnaround



We all agree that the D won't be fixed in one draft. I'm not saying we don't NEED to draft a DL position - but if we are wanting instant success, we will need to use the FA market to stabilize depth.

I'm not talking about building this team through FA, but using FA as a way to round out the roster. When you start drafting players, as they develop (hopefully - we all agree that Shanny failed at this - that's why he used FA) - you'd hope they start replacing/pushing your vets. Which leads to great depth, easier personnel decisions (better cap management).

A balanced approach and developing the roster for a team is a great way to go. If your team is excellent at drafting, it means you can pursue holes in the roster at a much more refined pace. (Less decisions made on overvaluing talent due to need).

I'm trying to look at the BIG picture in terms of a solid 3 year plan of drafting and putting a system in place that will breed success.

John Fox's draft history with the Panthers was balanced. They took a lot of DL later in the draft to develop. People want to cite Pittsburgh and their awesome front 7, but how many players on Pitt's D - were DL & LB's taken with 1st/2nd round picks? (I think it's 4 since 2006).

Just food for thought.

alkemical
04-26-2011, 06:41 AM
Also, for anyone that still wishes we would have drafted Ed Reed....

:D

You have to go with Peterson. :D

HAT
04-26-2011, 06:42 AM
this is my thinking as well, which is why ive warmed up to peterson, but still want miller, then peterson, then dareus.

Until the next tweet anyway.

Requiem
04-26-2011, 06:42 AM
Sorry,

But drafting Dareus, Fairley, etc. at #2 doesn't guarantee we do better in the trenches.

alkemical
04-26-2011, 06:44 AM
Sorry,

But drafting Dareus, Fairley, etc. at #2 doesn't guarantee we do better in the trenches.

that's where we have common ground. it's short term thinking, not long term thinking that is the rash thinking of only "need", and not maybe the best overall plan for long term success.

BroncoMan4ever
04-26-2011, 06:52 AM
this straight up means, Welcome to Denver Von Miller

BroncoInferno
04-26-2011, 06:57 AM
Sorry,

But drafting Dareus, Fairley, etc. at #2 doesn't guarantee we do better in the trenches.

This is what the guys with tunnel vision for DL at #2 don't get. Suh was one of the best DTs in the league right out of the gate, but guess what? The Lions D still sucked! They are going to have to have a another solid draft or two to get it turned around. I don't care how good Dareus is, if we don't draft well around him, the D will still stink. That's why we should just take the best defensive player on the board. There are other avenues by which to address the DL.

alkemical
04-26-2011, 07:18 AM
This is what the guys with tunnel vision for DL at #2 don't get. Suh was one of the best DTs in the league right out of the gate, but guess what? The Lions D still sucked! They are going to have to have a another solid draft or two to get it turned around. I don't care how good Dareus is, if we don't draft well around him, the D will still stink. That's why we should just take the best defensive player on the board. There are other avenues by which to address the DL.

http://img.search.com/thumb/0/0f/HankHill.jpg/200px-HankHill.jpg

yep

Requiem
04-26-2011, 07:22 AM
http://i50.tinypic.com/zn6fqt.jpg

^ Pretty much what the Orange Mane is. . . just through computers and not outside.

alkemical
04-26-2011, 07:36 AM
http://i50.tinypic.com/zn6fqt.jpg

^ Pretty much what the Orange Mane is. . . just through computers and not outside.

People are people... I do like king of the hill though. (I haven't watched it diligently - but I do enjoy it).

Drek
04-26-2011, 07:37 AM
Sorry,

But drafting Dareus, Fairley, etc. at #2 doesn't guarantee we do better in the trenches.

In fact, if you look at Fox's draft history in Carolina he never drafted a DT higher than the 3rd round. Kris Jenkins was drafted the year before he came in, but even after Jenkins left they never drafted an early round replacement. Fox kept developing them internally.

His teams tended to have very good DL play over that time, so assuming he's going to change his stripes and go with a DT early. DE (pass rushers specifically), LB, CB, and RB are his favorite early round picks. So if he's having any say you can expect us to go for Peterson or Miller. The DL fix will likely come through the later picks and FA whenever it opens.

Dedhed
04-26-2011, 07:40 AM
So you're going to take the best corner in the draft and make a safety out of him? No. I'm going to put a safety in the box because I can bet on great play from both CBs.


I'm sick of watching my team get smashed in the mouth on every down
fix the problem.

For the 2 millionth time, taking Peterson doesn't mean ignoring the front 7.

Dedhed
04-26-2011, 07:44 AM
What is a constant rotation to you? You said that a DT we drafted would play 15-20 plays a game as I recall. And that's absolutely absurd. Now if by rotation you mean they get spelled here or there, sure. But top-tier DTs in 4-3 defenses (to exclude 3-4 NTs which are a very different animal) play the vast majority of snaps.

Don't backpedal into semantics. EVERY DT plays in a rotation. PERIOD.

Dedhed
04-26-2011, 07:48 AM
I just want the player that turns out to be the best of the three more then what piece is more important building a D.

The thing that the "need" folks don't understand is that you're talking about the same guy.

oubronco
04-26-2011, 07:50 AM
Well hell lets just put eleven CB's out there who needs DT's, De's, or LB's then we could shutdown the whole field

bronco militia
04-26-2011, 07:51 AM
this team has tried to fix through FA for way too long, is there any REAL success story they have to show for it? dre bly, niko, jamal williams?

rookies have immediate impacts all the time, especially if put in the right situation. this team needs to aim for quality players in the draft, not quantity.

Bingo

TheReverend
04-26-2011, 07:52 AM
Well hell lets just put eleven CB's out there who needs DT's, De's, or LB's then we could shutdown the whole field

That was a rational response...

driver
04-26-2011, 07:55 AM
Sorry,

But drafting Dareus, Fairley, etc. at #2 doesn't guarantee we do better in the trenches.

You're right and no it doesn't. But we can try to improve it. Right now I'd settle for lousy over stink the stadium up rotten. How about you?
As for the ,He's not worth the #2 pick, I agree. Peterson or Miller might be but I don't think so. Trade down if we can, is our best option IMO.

oubronco
04-26-2011, 07:56 AM
That was a rational response...

Just being sarcastic :wave:

TheElusiveKyleOrton
04-26-2011, 08:14 AM
In fact, if you look at Fox's draft history in Carolina he never drafted a DT higher than the 3rd round. Kris Jenkins was drafted the year before he came in, but even after Jenkins left they never drafted an early round replacement. Fox kept developing them internally.

His teams tended to have very good DL play over that time, so assuming he's going to change his stripes and go with a DT early. DE (pass rushers specifically), LB, CB, and RB are his favorite early round picks. So if he's having any say you can expect us to go for Peterson or Miller. The DL fix will likely come through the later picks and FA whenever it opens.

I hope you're right. I just think missing out on Peterson will be something we regret, regardless of whether or not Dareus is a good player. He doesn't have as high a ceiling as Peterson, and I think with Peterson we're looking at a perennial all-pro. I see another guy with Dareus -- a big, talented guy, to be sure -- not a certain all-pro.

BroncoMan4ever
04-26-2011, 08:39 AM
This is what the guys with tunnel vision for DL at #2 don't get. Suh was one of the best DTs in the league right out of the gate, but guess what? The Lions D still sucked! They are going to have to have a another solid draft or two to get it turned around. I don't care how good Dareus is, if we don't draft well around him, the D will still stink. That's why we should just take the best defensive player on the board. There are other avenues by which to address the DL.

best player on the board is AJ Green, but we don't need a receiver. next best is Peterson but we have all been witness to what greatness in the secondary combined with mediocrity or pure suck in the front 7 leads to, 4-12 and the number 2 pick in the draft.

build from the trenches back. and since Corner is an area of need, but not worth potentially over 70 million guaranteed, i prefer go after someone like Jalil Brown in the 3rd or 4th.

my dream draft breakdown if i were in charge with the #2, #36, and #46 would be to come away with Dareus, Mason Foster and Quan Studivarnt. then in the 3rd get Jalil Brown.

all 3 levels of the defense have been addressed and upgraded, and we aren't potentially on the hook for over 70million guaranteed to just 1 position, especially a position that if the last few years have been any indication can be avoided completely.

HAT
04-26-2011, 08:43 AM
my dream draft breakdown if i were in charge with the #2, #36, and #46 would be to come away with Dareus, Mason Foster and Quan Studivarnt. then in the 3rd get Jalil Brown.
.

Thank God you're not then....Over drafting a plug and play DT followed by two **** LB's ? LULZ

TheElusiveKyleOrton
04-26-2011, 08:46 AM
best player on the board is AJ Green, but we don't need a receiver. next best is Peterson but we have all been witness to what greatness in the secondary combined with mediocrity or pure suck in the front 7 leads to, 4-12 and the number 2 pick in the draft.

build from the trenches back. and since Corner is an area of need, but not worth potentially over 70 million guaranteed, i prefer go after someone like Jalil Brown in the 3rd or 4th.

my dream draft breakdown if i were in charge with the #2, #36, and #46 would be to come away with Dareus, Mason Foster and Quan Studivarnt. then in the 3rd get Jalil Brown.

all 3 levels of the defense have been addressed and upgraded, and we aren't potentially on the hook for over 70million guaranteed to just 1 position, especially a position that if the last few years have been any indication can be avoided completely.

Peterson + Paea (or Austin) >>>>>>>>>>>>> Dareus + Foster + Sturdivant.

BroncoMan4ever
04-26-2011, 08:51 AM
For the 2 millionth time, taking Peterson doesn't mean ignoring the front 7.

true, but it does mean again filling the need on the line and in the front 7 as a hole with 2nd raters.

we have opportunity for the cream of the crop on the DL.

look at it this way. even if Peterson is Champ Bailey in his prime good a perennial pro bowler a future HOF candidate, and due to us taking him at 2, we have to plug into the front 7, the 2nd and 3rd tier draft picks, who are not going to be much better than their predecessors, how much good is having 2 elite corners going to do for the team. Champ can tell you, not much, he rarely sees a pass come his way. now imagine 2 players of Champ's calibur starting on the opposite sides of the field with just marginal upgrade of the defense we had last year. teams will dink and dunk on our LBs, TE will have career days, and teams will pound the rock all damn day, avoiding the massive investment in the secondary.

now, let's say Dareus or even Fairley, let's say whichever we get is a good starter, not a pro bowler, not an all pro, not a future Hall of Famer just a good starter. his impact on the field in eating up space, clogging running lanes, drawing double teams, makes the entire defense better. it opens things up for Doom and Ayers to rush the passer, which causes bad throws and stupid mistakes by the QB and leads to ducks thrown to our secondary. Our LBs are now playing read and react because plays are happening in front of them instead of having to watch over the line in front of them.

even if Peterson is a HOF calibur player, his impact to this team would not be anywhere near as high as would a just good DL.

BroncoMan4ever
04-26-2011, 08:54 AM
Thank God you're not then....Over drafting a plug and play DT followed by two **** LB's ? LULZ

better than taking Peterson and potentially being on the hook for over 70 million in guarateed money to just the CB position, and then trading what little we have left to jump back into the 1st for Liuget.

JDB7821
04-26-2011, 09:46 AM
true, but it does mean again filling the need on the line and in the front 7 as a hole with 2nd raters.

we have opportunity for the cream of the crop on the DL.

look at it this way. even if Peterson is Champ Bailey in his prime good a perennial pro bowler a future HOF candidate, and due to us taking him at 2, we have to plug into the front 7, the 2nd and 3rd tier draft picks, who are not going to be much better than their predecessors, how much good is having 2 elite corners going to do for the team. Champ can tell you, not much, he rarely sees a pass come his way. now imagine 2 players of Champ's calibur starting on the opposite sides of the field with just marginal upgrade of the defense we had last year. teams will dink and dunk on our LBs, TE will have career days, and teams will pound the rock all damn day, avoiding the massive investment in the secondary.

now, let's say Dareus or even Fairley, let's say whichever we get is a good starter, not a pro bowler, not an all pro, not a future Hall of Famer just a good starter. his impact on the field in eating up space, clogging running lanes, drawing double teams, makes the entire defense better. it opens things up for Doom and Ayers to rush the passer, which causes bad throws and stupid mistakes by the QB and leads to ducks thrown to our secondary. Our LBs are now playing read and react because plays are happening in front of them instead of having to watch over the line in front of them.

even if Peterson is a HOF calibur player, his impact to this team would not be anywhere near as high as would a just good DL.

You don't take a defensive tackle at number two just to eat up space. I'm sorry, but that's a terrible waste. You can find space-eaters later in the draft. I used Paea as an example, but Austin, Jenkins, Nevis, etc. can do the same things.

My point is this: if Marcell Dareus is the next Warren Sapp, you take him without ANY question. The problem I have with that is he doesn't look anywhere near as dominant as Sapp or even Suh. I keep hearing about how versatile he is, but what does that really matter? The Broncos would be drafting him to play the 3-technique in their front. It shouldn't matter that he CAN play in a 3-4 or even the nose in the 4-3, he won't be doing it.

I just feel like passing on a vastly superior talent, in my opinion, is a huge mistake just to try to fill a need that can be filled later on. John Fox uses a very similar defense to what we have in Atlanta and our starting defensive tackles last season were drafted in the 2nd and 3rd rounds, with our first rounder still recovering. I want to emphasize that a little more...a third round rookie stepped in from day one on a playoff caliber team and started at defensive tackle all season last year. You can find guys later that can fit at defensive tackle in this draft, but I know for a fact there aren't any other corners like Peterson out there.

baja
04-26-2011, 09:50 AM
You don't take a defensive tackle at number two just to eat up space. I'm sorry, but that's a terrible waste. You can find space-eaters later in the draft. I used Paea as an example, but Austin, Jenkins, Nevis, etc. can do the same things.

My point is this: if Marcell Dareus is the next Warren Sapp, you take him without ANY question. The problem I have with that is he doesn't look anywhere near as dominant as Sapp or even Suh. I keep hearing about how versatile he is, but what does that really matter? The Broncos would be drafting him to play the 3-technique in their front. It shouldn't matter that he CAN play in a 3-4 or even the nose in the 4-3, he won't be doing it.

<b>I just feel like passing on a vastly superior talent, in my opinion, is a huge mistake just to try to fill a need that can be filled later on.</b> John Fox uses a very similar defense to what we have in Atlanta and our starting defensive tackles last season were drafted in the 2nd and 3rd rounds, with our first rounder still recovering. I want to emphasize that a little more...a third round rookie stepped in from day one on a playoff caliber team and started at defensive tackle all season last year. You can find guys later that can fit at defensive tackle in this draft, but I know for a fact there aren't any other corners like Peterson out there.

This is what the people that want Marcell Dareus are missing.

baja
04-26-2011, 09:51 AM
If you get a chance to draft a once in a generation player you take him.

Inkana7
04-26-2011, 10:17 AM
Personally I don't care who we take as long as it's a defender and they don't bust. This defense is so bad that anyone at #2 who doesn't bust will be great for us. I don't see the need to start blood feuds with each other when all of these players can help the Broncos immensely.

alkemical
04-26-2011, 10:23 AM
Personally I don't care who we take as long as it's a defender and they don't bust. This defense is so bad that anyone at #2 who doesn't bust will be great for us. I don't see the need to start blood feuds with each other when all of these players can help the Broncos immensely.

Come on, it's the OM. Blood feuds and stupid arguments is how this place rolls.

Hulamau
04-26-2011, 10:33 AM
Good take .. JBD

oubronco
04-26-2011, 10:37 AM
If you get a chance to draft a once in a generation player you take him.

What alot are saying is they don't believe Peterson is a once in a lifetime player and every year there is a once in a lifetime player that doesn't live up to the hype and they don't think PP will either

SureShot
04-26-2011, 10:41 AM
What alot are saying is they don't believe Peterson is a once in a lifetime player and every year there is a once in a lifetime player that doesn't live up to the hype and they don't think PP will either

Our head coach disagrees.

bronco militia
04-26-2011, 10:43 AM
I think a lot of the people who are on the Peterson bandwagon have homosexual tendencies. What these people need to realize is that picking football players isnt like looking for a "partner" while hanging out at the beach. They need to realize the fat guys are good too even if they dont look as good in jeans as DBs.

epic post

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

SureShot
04-26-2011, 10:44 AM
I think Orange se7en is a fat guy.

orange crusher
04-26-2011, 10:45 AM
Peterson + Paea (or Austin) >>>>>>>>>>>>> Dareus + Foster + Sturdivant.

IMO Dareus + Austin (or Paea) trumps both.

Hulamau
04-26-2011, 10:48 AM
This is what the people that want Marcell Dareus are missing.

Yep that is my view as well. Its not that we don't want Marcel or a guy somewhat like him ! Hell yes we absolutely MUST come away with at least one SOLID DT with a lot of up side... Speaking of which, the question remains if Dareus has a lot more upside or is he already now more or less peaked and what he is going to be??

AS good as he looks, I still am not convinced he's a rare once in 10 year DT that we simply cant fill with another dependable guy making him a lock as value at #2 .. perhaps we can get a guy later with even more upside ala Austin in the 2nd round?

Its a lot easier to argue Paea or Austin rounding out to being more or less as good as Dareus ... or perhaps better ... than it is arguing at this stage of the game that any other corner in this or any recent drafts in memory ... will have anywhere near the impact Peterson likely will!

People talk about we don't need another shut down corner because Champ is one. Leaving aside Champ will no longer be a shutdown in a couple more years when he loses another step and transitions to safety ... in the mean time having two shut down guys on the field presents huge challenges to any offense. You cant avoid both of them! Dinking to the TE and RB all day is way too one dimensional and wouldn't get very far.

In any event, we DO need a good DT or two, in this draft in particular our odds are very high of doing just that, even with picking Peterson or Miller at #2.

My feeling though is that with all the public praise toward Peterson by Fox, Elway and Xanders we might not be taking him and are trying to set up other trade back partners to vie with the teams wanting Gabbert or Newton for our #2 pick and up the ante?... Perhaps we are hoping for Miller at #5 plus a third 2nd rounder??

underrated29
04-26-2011, 11:01 AM
People talk about we don't need another shut down corner because Champ is one. Leaving aside Champ will no longer be a shutdown in a couple more years when he loses another step and transitions to safety ... in the mean time having two shut down guys on the field presents huge challenges to any offense. You cant avoid both of them! Dinking to the TE and RB all day is way too one dimensional and wouldn't get very far.





But why would a team pass when they can just run the ball right up our asses? I mean, they already did that when we had 4 DTs on our roster. Right now we have 1. Who cares about champ and PP when a FB can run it 50+ yards for a TD?- yes that happened last year.

Great13
04-26-2011, 11:02 AM
IMO Dareus + Austin (or Paea) trumps both.

Yes! Dareus + Paea FTW.

Rabb
04-26-2011, 11:13 AM
But why would a team pass when they can just run the ball right up our asses? I mean, they already did that when we had 4 DTs on our roster. Right now we have 1. Who cares about champ and PP when a FB can run it 50+ yards for a TD?- yes that happened last year.

once again

if they took PP, I am quite sure they would get some DT talent in the 2nd round that has little to very marginal drop off from Dareus

we have more than one draft pick this year, crazy I know

TheReverend
04-26-2011, 11:19 AM
Stupid talking monkeys.

There's a good chance we can leave this draft with Peterson, two of potentially Liuget, Wilkerson, Paea, Austin or a solid LB prospect, Carpenter as a great OT grinder option in the third, and RB and DT depth with Royster and Thornton to close out the draft.

With that, if we have an even average FA class, we'll have a revamped and talented roster with a huge youth injection in areas where we absolutely NEED it.

http://chzupnextinsports.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/funny-sports-pictures-come-at-me-bro.jpg

TheReverend
04-26-2011, 11:21 AM
...and I'm still waiting for ANYONE to propose that Dareus is the proper pick based off his talent level and not just as a front 7 need.

ANYONE.

Mountain Bronco
04-26-2011, 11:23 AM
I don't care about position at the #2 slot, I care about elite. None of the Dline prospects are elite. If it were Suh or even McCoy from last year I would be psyched about geting either of them, because both were elite prospects. None of the Dline guys compare, yet PP is a once in a decade talent. Dudes 6'1'' don't run a sub 4.4.

TheReverend
04-26-2011, 11:24 AM
best player on the board is AJ Green, but we don't need a receiver.

...........what?

He's a fantastic player, and #3 in my book, but where in God's name did you see this?

Mountain Bronco
04-26-2011, 11:26 AM
But why would a team pass when they can just run the ball right up our asses? I mean, they already did that when we had 4 DTs on our roster. Right now we have 1. Who cares about champ and PP when a FB can run it 50+ yards for a TD?- yes that happened last year.

An elite secondary also allows us to use 8 in the box on a regular basis and extends Dawkin's usefullness for another year as a quasi linebacker which will also help with the run.

PP also helps with run protection as he is a great tackler for a CB much like champ does on those strung out sweeps.

underrated29
04-26-2011, 11:36 AM
once again

if they took PP, I am quite sure they would get some DT talent in the 2nd round that has little to very marginal drop off from Dareus

we have more than one draft pick this year, crazy I know



Wow that is crazy.

I never knew that 2 2nds and a 3rd can totally reshape the front 7 and make us better against the run then when we were last year with guys who were not Rookies. I am happy now.

underrated29
04-26-2011, 11:38 AM
...and I'm still waiting for ANYONE to propose that Dareus is the proper pick based off his talent level and not just as a front 7 need.

ANYONE.




likewise for PP.



you can build a house of cards and call it a house all you want, but no matter what is argued it is still a house of cards and will topple over. Build a house out of bricks and you get better results.

TheReverend
04-26-2011, 11:39 AM
Wow that is crazy.

I never knew that 2 2nds and a 3rd can totally reshape the front 7 and make us better against the run then when we were last year with guys who were not Rookies. I am happy now.

But #2 overall, can huh? Ha!

alkemical
04-26-2011, 12:05 PM
But #2 overall, can huh? Ha!

It's made with 100% unicorn!

http://foggedclarity.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/canned_unicorn_meat-257x300.jpg

Drek
04-26-2011, 12:07 PM
...and I'm still waiting for ANYONE to propose that Dareus is the proper pick based off his talent level and not just as a front 7 need.

ANYONE.
I can't imagine anyone would try.

Anyone who denies Peterson is something less than a once in a generation prospect at the corner position is in denial. Champ and Charles Woodson were the last two CBs to come out of college with his pedigree. Woodson is 34, Bailey is 32. There isn't a comparable CB prospect in college football today and their isn't a blue chipper with his ceiling entering college this next season. He is quite literally a once in a decade talent.

The argument someone could try to make for Dareus is a Marcus Stroud, Albert Haynesworth, or Kris Jenkins type. Of course that argument centers around the notion that Dareus won't take half a decade to realize his potential like Haynesworth did, or see the quick downhill decline to his career that Stroud and Jenkins have seen on the other side of 30.

The only talent you could argue is on par with Peterson is Miller, and that is probably still one hell of a stretch. He's really good but his skill set makes him look rather pigeon holed into the 3-4 OLB role if you want immediate plug and play elite production. He also is a little on the lighter side for that job. He's very much like DeMarcus Ware, but then Ware came in with Merriman and since them we've seen others who perform on that level (Clay Matthews for example). Some guys like James Harrison and Elvis Dumervil come out of nowhere to fill that role too. So while a guy like Miller might be a superb athlete and very valuable, is he really all that rare?

The question is do you want the next Champ Bailey, the next DeMarcus Ware, or the next Marcus Stroud. The most versatile, consistently productive, and longest career all side with the same guy as an added bit of info.

TheReverend
04-26-2011, 12:12 PM
I can't imagine anyone would try.

Anyone who denies Peterson is something less than a once in a generation prospect at the corner position is in denial. Champ and Charles Woodson were the last two CBs to come out of college with his pedigree. Woodson is 34, Bailey is 32. There isn't a comparable CB prospect in college football today and their isn't a blue chipper with his ceiling entering college this next season. He is quite literally a once in a decade talent.

The argument someone could try to make for Dareus is a Marcus Stroud, Albert Haynesworth, or Kris Jenkins type. Of course that argument centers around the notion that Dareus won't take half a decade to realize his potential like Haynesworth did, or see the quick downhill decline to his career that Stroud and Jenkins have seen on the other side of 30.

The only talent you could argue is on par with Peterson is Miller, and that is probably still one hell of a stretch. He's really good but his skill set makes him look rather pigeon holed into the 3-4 OLB role if you want immediate plug and play elite production. He also is a little on the lighter side for that job. He's very much like DeMarcus Ware, but then Ware came in with Merriman and since them we've seen others who perform on that level (Clay Matthews for example). Some guys like James Harrison and Elvis Dumervil come out of nowhere to fill that role too. So while a guy like Miller might be a superb athlete and very valuable, is he really all that rare?

The question is do you want the next Champ Bailey, the next DeMarcus Ware, or the next Marcus Stroud. The most versatile, consistently productive, and longest career all side with the same guy as an added bit of info.

Repped for excellent post, though I'd put Green on that same talent tier as Miller.

Rabb
04-26-2011, 12:44 PM
Wow that is crazy.

I never knew that 2 2nds and a 3rd can totally reshape the front 7 and make us better against the run then when we were last year with guys who were not Rookies. I am happy now.


ah ok, so getting Dareus would do just that, right?

Drek
04-26-2011, 12:50 PM
Repped for excellent post, though I'd put Green on that same talent tier as Miller.

Sure. Green is a standout WR but he's not Calvin Johnson and so while he's a "special" talent he isn't a "once in a decade" talent.

When guys like Peterson, Calvin Johnson, Suh, Ware, etc. come out of college you often see them come out in a "bubble" of special talents at their position because the collegiate game is at least as much a copy cat league as the NFL. Tim Tebow dominates and suddenly every school in the SEC and half the rest are benching the blue chipper pocket passers to throw their best 6'2" to 6'5", 220 to 250 pound athlete with an arm out at QB to see if they can replicate that success. Its the nature of things and it begets conditioning to match so the athletic profiles start to match up with what we've seen previously.

But it goes without saying that all of these bubbles have their peak player within them. Sometimes he comes at the front. Sometimes he's at the back. But the team that identifies that peak player and snags him up always looks real damn smart in hindsight.

The Lions have grabbed two in Calvin Johnson and Ndamakung Suh. Not so long ago they lost every game. Last year they were extremely competitive in a division with a team who went to the NFCC last year and both teams from this year's NFCC. Not exactly a weak division, and thats with a QB who can't stay healthy.

Patrick Peterson is that kind of peak player. No CB before him and no CB after him has his raw physical make up combined with as much experience and production on the field at the highest level of collegiate play.

I personally believe we stole one previously in this new bubble of 6'2" to 6'5", 220-250 pound QBs who can run or pass that the spread offense is breeding because I've yet to see any of this current crop or any of the predecessors dominate college football the way Tebow has, or show the ability to turn broken plays into positive yards like he did in his three starts last year. But time will tell on that one. You don't have to wait for that on Peterson, you just pick him and laugh yourself all the way to the bank for the next decade and a half.

Carmelo15
04-26-2011, 12:54 PM
Sure. Green is a standout WR but he's not Calvin Johnson and so while he's a "special" talent he isn't a "once in a decade" talent.

When guys like Peterson, Calvin Johnson, Suh, Ware, etc. come out of college you often see them come out in a "bubble" of special talents at their position because the collegiate game is at least as much a copy cat league as the NFL. Tim Tebow dominates and suddenly every school in the SEC and half the rest are benching the blue chipper pocket passers to throw their best 6'2" to 6'5", 220 to 250 pound athlete with an arm out at QB to see if they can replicate that success. Its the nature of things and it begets conditioning to match so the athletic profiles start to match up with what we've seen previously.

But it goes without saying that all of these bubbles have their peak player within them. Sometimes he comes at the front. Sometimes he's at the back. But the team that identifies that peak player and snags him up always looks real damn smart in hindsight.

The Lions have grabbed two in Calvin Johnson and Ndamakung Suh. Not so long ago they lost every game. Last year they were extremely competitive in a division with a team who went to the NFCC last year and both teams from this year's NFCC. Not exactly a weak division, and thats with a QB who can't stay healthy.

Patrick Peterson is that kind of peak player. No CB before him and no CB after him has his raw physical make up combined with as much experience and production on the field at the highest level of collegiate play.

I personally believe we stole one previously in this new bubble of 6'2" to 6'5", 220-250 pound QBs who can run or pass that the spread offense is breeding because I've yet to see any of this current crop or any of the predecessors dominate college football the way Tebow has, or show the ability to turn broken plays into positive yards like he did in his three starts last year. But time will tell on that one. You don't have to wait for that on Peterson, you just pick him and laugh yourself all the way to the bank for the next decade and a half.

Some nice arguments in here. Rep

Chris
04-26-2011, 12:57 PM
I don't care about position at the #2 slot, I care about elite. None of the Dline prospects are elite. If it were Suh or even McCoy from last year I would be psyched about geting either of them, because both were elite prospects. None of the Dline guys compare, yet PP is a once in a decade talent. Dudes 6'1'' don't run a sub 4.4.

Fairley could be elite especially if he puts on some strength. He's perfect for a trade down.

underrated29
04-26-2011, 01:02 PM
ah ok, so getting Dareus would do just that, right?



Nope, once again your short sightedness on the mighty PP is falling you short.



The front 7 needs the work. It has been screwed over and over again. When or who was the last talent we got on the front 7? Trevor Pryce--no actually I think DJ williams was.

There you have it, ladies and gents, DJ williams.



We have 7 cb on the roster Right now! We have 6 people on the roster who can return kicks and punts. Right now!
We have **** at DL and at LB- 2 guys we know can play (doom and Dj) and one who we hope to high hell that he can (ayers) and nothing, nothing nothing nothing else!!!


A draft of

miller
dt-austin/paea-pick your poison
and another DE/DT/LB
and another de/dt/lb/ORT


is faaaaaaaaaaar more beneficial to fixing our 7th WORST ALL TIME DEFENSE IN THE HISTORY OF THE NFL then taking a CB with the #2 pick.


You want a CB- go sign Nnamdi- he is proven and will cost about the same. Then you still have the #2 to fix the team needs.






You PP have waged a personal war between PP and Dareus- when you get opinions different then yours. When in fact, most of us like PP- we do not guzzle him up like others do, but we also realize the way to fix a team is starting up front. Like Front 7- NOT JUST DT!

Chris
04-26-2011, 01:12 PM
...and I'm still waiting for ANYONE to propose that Dareus is the proper pick based off his talent level and not just as a front 7 need.

ANYONE.

I'd love to read an article trying to predict what Dareus could do in a 4-3.

TheReverend
04-26-2011, 01:40 PM
I'd love to read an article trying to predict what Dareus could do in a 4-3.

I genuinely think he can do it and do it well. He's a versatile player, very explosive, very powerful and quick.

...but he's no Peterson. Not even effing close.

TheReverend
04-26-2011, 01:44 PM
Nope, once again your short sightedness on the mighty PP is falling you short.

The front 7 needs the work. It has been screwed over and over again. When or who was the last talent we got on the front 7? Trevor Pryce--no actually I think DJ williams was.

There you have it, ladies and gents, DJ williams.

We have 7 cb on the roster Right now! We have 6 people on the roster who can return kicks and punts. Right now!
We have **** at DL and at LB- 2 guys we know can play (doom and Dj) and one who we hope to high hell that he can (ayers) and nothing, nothing nothing nothing else!!!

A draft of

miller
dt-austin/paea-pick your poison
and another DE/DT/LB
and another de/dt/lb/ORT

is faaaaaaaaaaar more beneficial to fixing our 7th WORST ALL TIME DEFENSE IN THE HISTORY OF THE NFL then taking a CB with the #2 pick.

You want a CB- go sign Nnamdi- he is proven and will cost about the same. Then you still have the #2 to fix the team needs.

You PP have waged a personal war between PP and Dareus- when you get opinions different then yours. When in fact, most of us like PP- we do not guzzle him up like others do, but we also realize the way to fix a team is starting up front. Like Front 7- NOT JUST DT!

1. Lol'd at accusations of "short sighted" + your repetition of "front 7" because that's literally your only point.

2. Why so many random spaces?

3. Your "A draft of" section is really poorly thought out. We were the 2nd worst team in the NFL. Our defense was the worst in Denver history as far I'm aware. We need to approach the draft by selecting the most talented players and infusing youth and talent into the defense. At any level. No one is saying ignore the "front 7" (20x). People are saying get the best ****ing football players in Orange and Blue.

BroncoMan4ever
04-26-2011, 02:01 PM
...and I'm still waiting for ANYONE to propose that Dareus is the proper pick based off his talent level and not just as a front 7 need.

ANYONE.

from what i have seen of the guy. he has a **** ton of strength and is capable of rushing from the middle of the line. it wasn't seen as often with him playing the nose a lot and basically just having to hold up the line. he is a good tackler, good run stuffer, he will command a lot of double teams, which will mean Doom and Ayers or any other pass rusher we have are now facing one on ones or are potentially unblocked. is he at Suh's level....no, but honestly about 95% of the DT in the NFL aren't at Suh's level. but he is a strong solid guy to build the DL around as he is the most complete DL prospect in this draft. he won't have the learning curve a lot of DL have because he has been running in a pro style environment for the last few years.

my reasoning here may not sway you on his talent, but they are the reasons i want him more than any other player in this draft.

a just good DL will have more of an impact for a defense than a HOF corner ever will.

DarkHorse
04-26-2011, 02:06 PM
I'm just curious here - is Dareus that much of a superstar that he's going to make more of a difference for our defense than.........


1 - Hiring a defensive coach in John Fox

2 - Switching back to a 4-3 base defense from the failed attempt at a 3-4

3 - A healthy Elvis Dumervil and Robert Ayers finally playing his natural position

4 - Hiring a defensive coach in John Fox


1 very good 'need' player in a draft that is loaded at that position added to an almost instantly improved defense over a BPA 'need' player that is head and shoulders above his peers of the same position?

1a - Peterson
1b - Dareus
1c - Miller

Peterson and Miller - both being described by the talking heads as 'elite can't miss prospects'

Not my words - Charley Casserly, Mayock and several others...........but we all know some of the 'mane experts are way more informed than these idiots on tv.

TheReverend
04-26-2011, 02:08 PM
likewise for PP.



you can build a house of cards and call it a house all you want, but no matter what is argued it is still a house of cards and will topple over. Build a house out of bricks and you get better results.

...what?

You haven't seen a talent argument for Peterson?

Are you on drugs?

Here:

On field performance:

* 2010 First-Team Walter Camp All-American
* 2010 Thorpe Award Winner
* 2010 Bednarik Award Winner
* 2010 SEC Defensive Player of the Year
* 2010 Preseason All-American (TSN, Playboy, Athlon, Lindy's, Phil Steele)
* 2009 Second-Team All-America (TSN)
* 2009 First-Team All-SEC (ESPN)
* 2009 Second-Team All-SEC (AP, Coaches)
* 2007 High School Defensive Player of the Year (USA Today)

Physical measurables:

When asked about LSU cornerback Patrick Peterson, Fox said: "I'll be honest with you, I had Rod Woodson, Gil Byrd, I've had some pretty good guys. I've never seen anything like (Peterson), with that size, that speed. I don't think there's been a 219-pound guy run a 4.3. He's a special talent. That's the way the game's changed, he's about the same height as Rod, but 219 pounds and ran 4.3."

He's hands down the most qualified defender coming into the NFL.