PDA

View Full Version : LSU's Peterson best player at wrong position for Broncos


Bronco Rob
04-26-2011, 04:10 AM
LSU's Peterson best player at wrong position for Broncos


Patrick Peterson makes sense for the Broncos to draft only if taking a great player makes sense.

Otherwise, he's not a fit, because of his position.

Peterson, a Louisiana State junior, is a shutdown cornerback. If there's one position the defensive-weak Broncos have covered, it's shutdown corner. Champ Bailey has played in 10 Pro Bowls, an NFL record for a cornerback.

The Broncos also have not one but two potential starters at right cornerback: Andre Goodman and Perrish Cox.

It also might not make financial sense for the Broncos to draft Peterson on Thursday. While it's uncertain what the NFL's new collective bargaining agreement will be, under the old agreement the No. 2 overall pick would get a contract worth up to $75 million, with $45 million guaranteed.

The Broncos just signed Bailey to a $43 million contract, with $22 million guaranteed. A similar investment in Peterson wouldn't leave the Broncos much money to address their many needs along their defensive front seven.

So it seems incomprehensible that the Broncos would use the No. 2 pick of the draft to strengthen one of their few strengths. Just not as incomprehensible as Peterson is as a player.

Two sets of numbers boggle the most skeptical of NFL minds: 219 and 4.34. Peterson, 6- 1/2 and 219 pounds, runs the 40-yard dash in 4.34 seconds.

"I had Rod Woodson, Gil Byrd, (Terry McDaniel). I've had some pretty good guys," Broncos coach John Fox said. "I've never seen anything like this kid. That size and that speed . . ."

Woodson is in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. The comparisons don't end there.

"Guys taken recently, he's better than (Terence) Newman, better than (Joe) Haden. Better, more disciplined than DeAngelo Hall and better than Dunta Robinson," said Charley Casserly, a 16-year NFL general manager who now works for CBS.

Newman was the No. 5 pick of the Dallas Cowboys in the 2003 draft. Haden went No. 7 to Cleveland last year. Hall went No. 8 to Atlanta in 2004, the year Houston took Robinson at No. 10. All of those corners have been solid contributors.





for the rest.....

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_17927708

lostknight
04-26-2011, 06:19 AM
My guess is that either he or Champ would move to safety.

Requiem
04-26-2011, 06:27 AM
He is the best player.

Don't give a **** about the $.

I want a player who can be with the franchise for a long time and contribute at a high level.

He is the player to do that.

Though, he will probably GTFO after his initial contract here if we keep sucking like we have been for the past half decade.

C'mon down, Peterson!

jmz313
04-26-2011, 06:38 AM
The Article sums it up... We dont need a Corner.

i prefer building the Front 7 and let the Corners we have (which are a solid group) benefit from (hopefully) better play up front.

2005 Bengals style with Ex Broncos Deltha Oneil and Tory James. Looked like 2 Deion Sanders on the field due to the QB pressure that team was getting.

Requiem
04-26-2011, 06:41 AM
Bailey -- All-Pro/Pro-Bowler, getting older.
Goodman -- Average, getting older.
Cox -- Solid player, but legal problems.
Thompson -- Quality nickel or dime CB.

Who else do we even have?

We can do better EVERYWHERE on defense.

HAT
04-26-2011, 06:45 AM
I only read the headline....Is the author trying to say you shouldn't take BPA in the first round? What a douche.

BroncoMan4ever
04-26-2011, 06:49 AM
build up the front 7 and we can field a mediocre and aging secondary and it will look just fine playing behind a good front 7. no need to invest over potentially 100 Million of which about 70 Million would be guaranteed on the CB position.

alkemical
04-26-2011, 06:50 AM
Bailey -- All-Pro/Pro-Bowler, getting older.
Goodman -- Average, getting older.
Cox -- Solid player, but legal problems.
Thompson -- Quality nickel or dime CB.

Who else do we even have?

We can do better EVERYWHERE on defense.

Totally. You need to have a stud at each level of the D. We have an aging Secondary, and thin on talent as a whole. No matter which stud we end up with, we are going to be far better for it.

Most people here also seem to think that rookie DT's have some instant magical impact. I'm sorry, but DT's need to develop, and sometimes their learning curve is pretty steep depending on scheme, system - and well - talent.

Drafting the best talent for the D of this team, is the way to go. For "right now" holes, i'd rather sign a few FA vets to short term contracts and develop players to push/replace those guys.

Watch good teams, that's what they do. Bad teams expect rookies to be their saviors.

alkemical
04-26-2011, 06:51 AM
build up the front 7 and we can field a mediocre and aging secondary and it will look just fine playing behind a good front 7. no need to invest over potentially 100 Million of which about 70 Million would be guaranteed on the CB position.

Give me a list of rookie DT's, that had an immediate impact for the full course of a 16 game season.

jmz313
04-26-2011, 06:53 AM
Bailey -- All-Pro/Pro-Bowler, getting older.
Goodman -- Average, getting older.
Cox -- Solid player, but legal problems.
Thompson -- Quality nickel or dime CB.

Who else do we even have?

We can do better EVERYWHERE on defense.

I read that as a shutdown corner the team believes in still.
A Solid Vet starter who plays well.
A young bonehead that has talent and hopefully will be one team for years to come.
And another talented young guy who has potential.

id list out D line and LBs in the similar way but, that would be depressing. Hell i think there is only 2 DTs on the roster anyway. CB is the strongest position on the Denver Broncos D. I'd rather invest in front 7 talent this year and wait for a shot at the next peterson, bailey, sanders, woodson, revis, etc to come along.

alkemical
04-26-2011, 06:54 AM
I read that as a shutdown corner the team believes in still.
A Solid Vet starter who plays well.
A young bonehead that has talent and hopefully will be one team for years to come.
And another talented young guy who has potential.

id list out D line and LBs in the similar way but, that would be depressing. Hell i think there is only 2 DTs on the roster anyway. CB is the strongest position on the Denver Broncos D. I'd rather invest in front 7 talent this year and wait for a shot at the next peterson, bailey, sanders, woodson, revis, etc to come along.



I don't want Cox anywhere on this team for his bull****.

jmz313
04-26-2011, 06:55 AM
Most people here also seem to think that rookie DT's have some instant magical impact. I'm sorry, but DT's need to develop, and sometimes their learning curve is pretty steep depending on scheme, system - and well - talent.

.

I agree, But you have to acquire those DT's at some point if you'd like to develop them. I think we might finally have a coach that would commit to developing a strong point of attack on D and Bring some good D back to Denver.

Willynowei
04-26-2011, 07:01 AM
Generally, you can't go wrong with taking the best player. Redskins had a pretty damn good corner when they took Champ, and then again when they took fred Smoot. Its a solid decision to have your hOF vet teach the young kid.

I'm all about D-line play but taking the best player just seems like the best strategy for such high picks.

Requiem
04-26-2011, 07:01 AM
Goodman doesn't play well.

Cox, as I said, is talented and has loads of potential -- on the field and to be a turd off the field.

Thompson, who I talked up all last year before the draft, is fine as a nickel or dime back.

I'm not thinking of getting a player that helps right now, but in the future too. Goodman isn't going to be on the Broncos for more than a few years. Eventually, Champ will probably play safety.

There is nothing wrong with selecting a premier player.

CB may be our strongest position on D, but that isn't saying much when your defense couldn't even shut down Moranis' Little Giants.

I want a guy who can contribute for a long time.

Not saying Dareus can't (he is my #2 choice behind Peterson) -- but I don't think he has the impact Peterson will have as a rookie.

And yeah, our DL sucks. If we go Peterson at #2, I hope two of our next three selections are DL.

I just want the best value at #2, the player with the shortest LTI and the highest IA. To me, that is Patrick Peterson.

People can stop with the logical fallacies that if we take Peterson at #2, we fail. That isn't a fail. That is a huge success because he should go #1 overall, but the Panthers are retarded. WEE.

Requiem
04-26-2011, 07:04 AM
I agree, But you have to acquire those DT's at some point if you'd like to develop them. I think we might finally have a coach that would commit to developing a strong point of attack on D and Bring some good D back to Denver.

Right, and if Denver takes Peterson they have three selections amongst rounds 2 and 3 to get those guys.

Do they run the risk of running out on one of the better players? Sure.

Dareus, Liuget and Fairley are Tier 1 DT's.

There are about 5 Tier 2 DT's, guys who will have good NFL careers.

Then there are about 3-5 other mid-round DT's who are better than anyone on our roster.

I don't think the Broncos are going to be short on options to upgrade their DL.

BroncoInferno
04-26-2011, 07:04 AM
After a solid 2009, Goodman was pretty terrible last season. Cox was decent, but certainly not anything to write home about, plus he's probably going to get suspended if he doesn't end up in jail. The Squid is a promising nickle/dime guy. That's not a "solid" group by any means. We need defensive help at all levels.

Requiem
04-26-2011, 07:08 AM
^ Preach on brother.

The funny thing about people knocking Peterson at #2, is that many of these same people (after researching their posts) advocate drafting players like:

Marvin Austin, who hasn't played football competitively in a year, and will not be in "football shape" or condition for camp.

Robert Quinn, Austin's teammate who has a brain tumor and was also suspended for being a dip****.

Phil Taylor, serious medical condition questions regarding foot and character concerns.

Other crappy players with injury concerns, character issues and overall just not good fits, etc.

Then you also have the people on the board who advocate drafting the same type of DT, etc. -- but projecting them to play the spot inside they are not suited for.

Hilarity.

jmz313
04-26-2011, 07:10 AM
Right, and if Denver takes Peterson they have three selections amongst rounds 2 and 3 to get those guys.

Do they run the risk of running out on one of the better players? Sure.

Dareus, Liuget and Fairley are Tier 1 DT's.

There are about 5 Tier 2 DT's, guys who will have good NFL careers.

Then there are about 3-5 other mid-round DT's who are better than anyone on our roster.

I don't think the Broncos are going to be short on options to upgrade their DL.

Or they can Take Von Miller, and use 2nd and 3rd rounds to sure up DT... which i would prefer if there is no Trade back scenario. thats just my opinion.

Theres a Draft every year and there will always be more "Can't Miss" players. I just think the front 7 needs the investment now if the Broncos are going to be back in the post season in 2 years.

jmz313
04-26-2011, 07:12 AM
After a solid 2009, Goodman was pretty terrible last season. Cox was decent, but certainly not anything to write home about, plus he's probably going to get suspended if he doesn't end up in jail. The Squid is a promising nickle/dime guy. That's not a "solid" group by any means. We need defensive help at all levels.

OK, i don't like Cox either but its the NFL and he's on the team. Goodman was all injured and such. I'll also give lots of guys passes since the team was so poorly managed for 2010.

Its a Solid group. the most solid on the Defense.

Drek
04-26-2011, 07:12 AM
Bailey -- All-Pro/Pro-Bowler, getting older.
Goodman -- Average, getting older.
Cox -- Solid player, but legal problems.
Thompson -- Quality nickel or dime CB.

Who else do we even have?

We can do better EVERYWHERE on defense.

Vaughn is still on the team, right? I'd put him in a similar pool with Thompson. Good nickel/dime/ST types.

An important factor to consider with Peterson is his versatility to play safety as well. Our new DC made some good things happen as a DB coach with Malcom Jenkins and his versatility. Peterson is a far superior talent to him. Being able to move him around the field is a big plus from a scheme standpoint and fixes the big secondary problem no one has any good suggestions on, the horrible safety play.

Requiem
04-26-2011, 07:15 AM
I think the whole defense needs investment now, which is why I'm advocating drafting an elite prospect (truly, the only one in my mind in this draft) in Peterson -- and taking the best DL and LB's available at #36, #46 and #67.

That way, we can address all levels of our defense, and hope that doing that (the smart move, addressing them all) will pay dividends in the future.

And I like Von Miller too, but I'm just not sure where you project him starting on this defense. Is it DE, so we have two of the same type of player at ends, which could be a liability against the run, or will he be a Joker like Thomas Davis was for Fox with the Panthers?

Either way, Peterson | Dareus | Miller give us a nice young prospect to build a defense around for the future.

I will be STOKED for any of them.

I just don't get the tunnel vision.

Requiem
04-26-2011, 07:18 AM
Vaughn is still on the team, right? I'd put him in a similar pool with Thompson. Good nickel/dime/ST types.

An important factor to consider with Peterson is his versatility to play safety as well. Our new DC made some good things happen as a DB coach with Malcom Jenkins and his versatility. Peterson is a far superior talent to him. Being able to move him around the field is a big plus from a scheme standpoint and fixes the big secondary problem no one has any good suggestions on, the horrible safety play.

Malcolm Jenkins
Tracy Porter
Patrick Robinson

I think these are all guys the Saints drafted while Allen was there, all good players or will be great IMHO. (Loved Robinson!) You make a very good point, Drek.

Couple that in with the fact that Fox was a DB coach too, and I think those two are getting really excited about what they could do with a guy like Peterson.

He will do more than what people just expect out of a cornerback. His versatility cannot be understated.

Requiem
04-26-2011, 07:20 AM
I forgot about Vaughn too, speed demon and great on special teams. To expect him to be anything more than depth though, might be a little too much. Who knows, he could surprise.

alkemical
04-26-2011, 07:20 AM
I agree, But you have to acquire those DT's at some point if you'd like to develop them. I think we might finally have a coach that would commit to developing a strong point of attack on D and Bring some good D back to Denver.

I'm not saying that we don't need to aquire talent, i'm just stating that @ #2: take the best player - regardless of need. Our D is devoid of real young talent. Our need, actually is the whole damn D! :D

jmz313
04-26-2011, 07:22 AM
Von Miller Would play SAM. I have zero Tunnel Vision as well. Peterson is worth the 2nd pick. I just not for the Broncos, IMO. if We take him, i'll just hope it works out like i have for so many other picks i didnt agree with.

In a perfect world we'd trade with ARZ, pocket their 2nd and another pick. Get Fairley at 5.

Requiem
04-26-2011, 07:24 AM
Fairley at 5? **** off. You don't draft him in the Top 5.

Hanging out with guys like J-Russell and sipping on purple drank. . . no thanks. The last thing we need to do is give Nick Fairley 50 million bones so he can raid the cough syrup cabinet at Walgreens.

Dedhed
04-26-2011, 07:27 AM
The Article sums it up... We dont need a Corner.

i prefer building the Front 7 and let the Corners we have (which are a solid group) benefit from (hopefully) better play up front.

2005 Bengals style with Ex Broncos Deltha Oneil and Tory James. Looked like 2 Deion Sanders on the field due to the QB pressure that team was getting.

The article sums up exactly why we've been among the very worst drafting teams in the NFL for the last decade.

alkemical
04-26-2011, 07:28 AM
I think the whole defense needs investment now, which is why I'm advocating drafting an elite prospect (truly, the only one in my mind in this draft) in Peterson -- and taking the best DL and LB's available at #36, #46 and #67.

That way, we can address all levels of our defense, and hope that doing that (the smart move, addressing them all) will pay dividends in the future.

And I like Von Miller too, but I'm just not sure where you project him starting on this defense. Is it DE, so we have two of the same type of player at ends, which could be a liability against the run, or will he be a Joker like Thomas Davis was for Fox with the Panthers?

Either way, Peterson | Dareus | Miller give us a nice young prospect to build a defense around for the future.

I will be STOKED for any of them.

I just don't get the tunnel vision.


IF we were playing a 3/4 - or a system like the pats or jets - i'd say miller would be a better fit.

jmz313
04-26-2011, 07:28 AM
The article sums up exactly why we've been among the very worst drafting teams in the NFL for the last decade.

Investing in CBs and Offensive players?

alkemical
04-26-2011, 07:31 AM
Fairley at 5? **** off. You don't draft him in the Top 5.

Hanging out with guys like J-Russell and sipping on purple drank. . . no thanks. The last thing we need to do is give Nick Fairley 50 million bones so he can raid the cough syrup cabinet at Walgreens.

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l256/gswyers/PurpleDrank.jpg

alkemical
04-26-2011, 07:34 AM
My guess is that either he or Champ would move to safety.

They would be able to mix packages/personnel around. It would add to flexibility. You'd also have a good mentor with the coaching staff & bailey.

TheReverend
04-26-2011, 07:40 AM
I have YET to see a compelling argument based on Dareus involving his level of "talent"

Drek
04-26-2011, 07:47 AM
He will do more than what people just expect out of a cornerback. His versatility cannot be understated.

With the love of teams around the league to go 3 wide with a receiving TE or 4 wide (even then possibly adding a receiving TE) it really makes a good role for someone as versatile as Peterson on this roster.

Imagine facing a nickel or dime package where Peterson lines up as a safety. Have him focus on the TE and you remove a problem that has killed the Broncos for the better part of this decade. Or maybe all 219 pounds of Peterson coming in at 4.34 speed on a safety or nickel CB blitz? If he goes unblocked a QB would probably have a hard time even finishing his drop.

alkemical
04-26-2011, 07:53 AM
I have YET to see a compelling argument based on Dareus involving his level of "talent"

The one thing I do like about him, is he's versatile on the DL. He can play along the line, and maybe help take advantage of matchup problems vs the OL.

That being said, without talent around him - this won't do much good. Everywhere he goes, the double team will follow. This of course devolves into a chicken/egg conversation on how we don't have any, because we don't draft any. Our FA choices have been terrible for the most part over the years, which has made our draft failures on the DL even more glaring.

I think with Peterson, i'd take him. Also, i'd have no problems using him on ST's. Play your best players.

oubronco
04-26-2011, 07:59 AM
I don't think it matters who they take of the top 3 defensive players cause I believe they will be picking top 3-4 next year as well

Dedhed
04-26-2011, 08:05 AM
Investing in CBs and Offensive players?
A few times, yes. We drafted Middlebrooks and Deltha based on need. We drafted Marcus Nash and Ashley Lelie based on need.

Kaylore
04-26-2011, 08:13 AM
With the love of teams around the league to go 3 wide with a receiving TE or 4 wide (even then possibly adding a receiving TE) it really makes a good role for someone as versatile as Peterson on this roster.

Imagine facing a nickel or dime package where Peterson lines up as a safety. Have him focus on the TE and you remove a problem that has killed the Broncos for the better part of this decade. Or maybe all 219 pounds of Peterson coming in at 4.34 speed on a safety or nickel CB blitz? If he goes unblocked a QB would probably have a hard time even finishing his drop.

I agree. But if it were that alone, he would still just be top ten, not top three pick in my opinion. For me, what puts him over the top is that he can play special teams. Not just play, but be a playmaker on special teams. I think THAT is why he's a top a three IMO.

baja
04-26-2011, 08:30 AM
Seems the smart guys here all want Peterson and the emotional guys all want a DT.

It's the smart guys that are going to be happy Thursday night. We are taking Peterson.

I called Lelie, I called Foster, I called Knowshon Moreno and I called Willie Middlebrooks (so I got a streak going here ;D )

This year I'm calling Patrick Peterson but the LB is a very close second and depends if they feel he can be a field leader ala Al Wilson. We do not take a DT with character issues at @ 2 in a draft deep in DT tallent. If Suh had waited until this year to come out we'd have nothing to talk about, he would be the pick but this year it's gonna be Peterson.

TheChamp24
04-26-2011, 09:03 AM
You don't draft for right now when you are rebuilding. Its for the future.
No, Peterson might not start, but he will. Goodman is about to be burnt toast out there, Champ will be moved to FS(or should) in a couple years and I don't trust Cox or Squid to become legit #1 CB's. #2 CB's and nickle corners, yeah I could see that.
Also, no pick is going to cost a fortune this year. The owners won't sign anybody to a phat rookie contract.
Peterson will become a #1 CB and a force.

schaaf
04-26-2011, 09:03 AM
Seems the smart guys here all want Peterson and the emotional guys all want a DT.

It's the smart guys that are going to be happy Thursday night. We are taking Peterson.

I called Lelie, I called Foster, I called Knowshon Moreno and I called Willie Middlebrooks (so I got a streak going here ;D )

This year I'm calling Patrick Peterson but the LB is a very close second and depends if they feel he can be a field leader ala Al Wilson. We do not take a DT with character issues at @ 2 in a draft deep in DT tallent. If Suh had waited until this year to come out we'd have nothing to talk about, he would be the pick but this year it's gonna be Peterson.

boom.

underrated29
04-26-2011, 10:36 AM
Baja- your streak is going to end this year then. I think its likely that we take Miller. Now if a trade down occurs (unlikely) then anyone is fair game. Still its doubtful that we take PP.




Yeah it is scary when teams go 4-5 wide and we have champ and PP and cox and whoever else out there.



You want to know what else is scary?
When a team is on 4th down, 4/5 wide and needs 20+ yards and a 6'6 290 lb QB runs for 40+ yards against us.

JAMARCUS RUSSELL anyone!?!?





Pass defense means **** when you can not stop the run. Ask the bengals and their star CBs what they think about pass and run d...or any player or any coach in the leauge. You run the ball and stop the run. Not run the ball and stop the pass.

bronco0608
04-26-2011, 10:59 AM
Ah, Patrick Peterson, Patrick Peterson.

How unfortunate.

If we were only picking 5th or later, he would make sense.

But alas.

We are at two.

How blue, a couple of fellows will be.

But this is life.

What should happen, will happen.

Beantown Bronco
04-26-2011, 11:05 AM
Pass defense means **** when you can not stop the run. Ask the bengals and their star CBs what they think about pass and run d...or any player or any coach in the leauge. You run the ball and stop the run. Not run the ball and stop the pass.

Run defense can be better addressed later on than with the #2 pick. The true "run stuffers" are predicted to go from the late first round through the entirety of the 2nd and even 3rd rounds. Not to mention free agency. Some prime run stuffers can be had there once the CBA is agreed to.

TheReverend
04-26-2011, 11:37 AM
I agree. But if it were that alone, he would still just be top ten, not top three pick in my opinion. For me, what puts him over the top is that he can play special teams. Not just play, but be a playmaker on special teams. I think THAT is why he's a top a three IMO.

His record setting ST perfomances had no bearing on him being voted the best defensive player in the nation by coaches and broadcasters

Carmelo15
04-26-2011, 11:40 AM
You know you're an elite prospect when people are just comparing you to current pro bowl level players, but guys that are in the Hall of Fame. Von Miller and has been compared to Derrick Thomas and John Fox compared Patrick Peterson to Rod Woodson. If we don't end up with one of these two we will have FAILED.

NFLBRONCO
04-26-2011, 12:05 PM
I think we will actually draft Miller now.

Mogulseeker
04-26-2011, 12:10 PM
A. Our secondary is decent, but old.
B. Champ will be moving to safety soon.
C. Cox is in trouble.
D. Goodman, I'm willing to concede, is above-average (but not a #1 corner).

I am, however, worried about Peterson's ability to develop new techniques and learn systems. I mean, single digit wonderlic is pretty pathetic... I could understand if he were like an 11 or 12, but by the wonderlic definition, he's illiterate.

Hulamau
04-26-2011, 12:17 PM
build up the front 7 and we can field a mediocre and aging secondary and it will look just fine playing behind a good front 7. no need to invest over potentially 100 Million of which about 70 Million would be guaranteed on the CB position.

You are assuming the same rookie scale and even the NFLPA doesn't want that!!

Drek
04-26-2011, 12:21 PM
I agree. But if it were that alone, he would still just be top ten, not top three pick in my opinion. For me, what puts him over the top is that he can play special teams. Not just play, but be a playmaker on special teams. I think THAT is why he's a top a three IMO.

The STs play doesn't even factor into it for me. This team never picks this high historically. The goal is to never pick this high again. So we need to make the most of the pick.

I've been kind of waffling all off-season on this. Late in the season when I was still hopeful we'd get a few more wins it was "I hope Peterson falls to us". After the season ended it was "We can definitely get Peterson though, awesome!" Then I started to talk myself out of it because our DT need has been a thorn in our sides for so damn long.

Now close to the draft I just can't see saying "we'll take the lesser player at a more 'valuable' position" when picking this high up in the draft. Bust rates in the NFL are just too damn high to let positional value cloud your judgement. Albert Pujols doesn't pass up a lame duck curve he can rope for a double so he can wait on the 95 mph fastball he can launch into the upper deck. Why? Because you don't pass up the opportunity to make good **** happen.

Peterson is the most likely candidate to make good **** happen for this franchise. If you worry about finding a way to use him, well, don't. Fox and Allen wouldn't be at the level they are in the NFL if they couldn't design some way to put guys like Peterson in the right spot to succeed. That is their job in this equation.

I could see Miller if, and only if, Fox and Allen had some particularly special wrinkle in mind for him and his unique talents. Something that boils down to us playing something more akin to a 5-2 than a 4-3 or 3-4. But that is an entire philosophy change and seems unlikely. Peterson fits in perfectly with what Allen has been doing in New Orleans with their diversely talented DBs.

TheReverend
04-26-2011, 12:33 PM
The STs play doesn't even factor into it for me. This team never picks this high historically. The goal is to never pick this high again. So we need to make the most of the pick.

I've been kind of waffling all off-season on this. Late in the season when I was still hopeful we'd get a few more wins it was "I hope Peterson falls to us". After the season ended it was "We can definitely get Peterson though, awesome!" Then I started to talk myself out of it because our DT need has been a thorn in our sides for so damn long.

Now close to the draft I just can't see saying "we'll take the lesser player at a more 'valuable' position" when picking this high up in the draft. Bust rates in the NFL are just too damn high to let positional value cloud your judgement. Albert Pujols doesn't pass up a lame duck curve he can rope for a double so he can wait on the 95 mph fastball he can launch into the upper deck. Why? Because you don't pass up the opportunity to make good **** happen.

Peterson is the most likely candidate to make good **** happen for this franchise. If you worry about finding a way to use him, well, don't. Fox and Allen wouldn't be at the level they are in the NFL if they couldn't design some way to put guys like Peterson in the right spot to succeed. That is their job in this equation.

I could see Miller if, and only if, Fox and Allen had some particularly special wrinkle in mind for him and his unique talents. Something that boils down to us playing something more akin to a 5-2 than a 4-3 or 3-4. But that is an entire philosophy change and seems unlikely. Peterson fits in perfectly with what Allen has been doing in New Orleans with their diversely talented DBs.

Arghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhbmaslanhdfuyvanund'f,las]dpgmasdiovn

Certainly, but what is that plan?

Part of the rational is that he's a great athlete in coverage.

So are we blitzing him or dropping him back on passing downs? Which is a better use of his skill set?

How often can we UTILIZE that skill set without becoming a 5-2 modified 34?

It's on the coaches to form a plan that he fits, but what if they can't?

Because a 52 is essentially a 34, especially with gap resonsibilities. We were abysmal at that last season AND cut ties with the players that fit that system up front.

Its a massive reset button, but in a bad way.

There is literally zero chance you can reference another source saying that or came to that conclusion independently within 24 hours...

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love that you read it, were able to competently process it and agree with it (that's seriously great - no sarcasm) ...but you could throw a reference in when you use it or something :P

Beantown Bronco
04-26-2011, 12:43 PM
Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love that you read it, were able to competently process it and agree with it (that's seriously great - no sarcasm) ...but you could throw a reference in when you use it or something :P

Taco should probably stickie this right under the denverpost copyright infringement thread.

Crushaholic
04-26-2011, 12:53 PM
You don't draft for right now when you are rebuilding. Its for the future.
No, Peterson might not start, but he will. Goodman is about to be burnt toast out there, Champ will be moved to FS(or should) in a couple years and I don't trust Cox or Squid to become legit #1 CB's. #2 CB's and nickle corners, yeah I could see that.
Also, no pick is going to cost a fortune this year. The owners won't sign anybody to a phat rookie contract.
Peterson will become a #1 CB and a force.

Not when you are paying someone #2 overall money. I expect the person taken to have an immediate impact...

Drek
04-26-2011, 01:25 PM
Arghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhbmaslanhdfuyvanund'f,las]dpgmasdiovn





There is literally zero chance you can reference another source saying that or came to that conclusion independently within 24 hours...

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love that you read it, were able to competently process it and agree with it (that's seriously great - no sarcasm) ...but you could throw a reference in when you use it or something :P

Sure thing man.

HEY EVERYONE! REV MENTIONED THAT BEST USING MILLER WOULD PUT US IN SOMETHING AKIN TO A 5-2, SO IF YOU MAKE SUGGESTIONS TO THAT EFFECT 1. THANK HIM FOR YOUR INSPIRATION AND 2. REFERENCE HIM YOU HEATHEN BASTARDS!

Better? ;P

Seriously though, while its an interesting idea, especially considering that prior to injury Doom dropped down to a similar weight and spent a year and an off-season adapting to standing up, is something that experimental how we should spend the 2nd overall pick? I'm the biggest "gadget" scheme junkie around (hence my ardent support of McDaniels) but you put Peterson, Paea, and a solid OLB pick along with the defensive coaching pedigree of Fox and Allen and we might just be a real good defense in a "boring" 4-3. At this point I'll take that.

TheReverend
04-26-2011, 01:34 PM
Sure thing man.

HEY EVERYONE! REV MENTIONED THAT BEST USING MILLER WOULD PUT US IN SOMETHING AKIN TO A 5-2, SO IF YOU MAKE SUGGESTIONS TO THAT EFFECT 1. THANK HIM FOR YOUR INSPIRATION AND 2. REFERENCE HIM YOU HEATHEN BASTARDS!

Better? ;P

Are you seriously implying you independently had the same random revelation roughly 12 hours after I posted that (most of that time during the night)?

Do you really want me to start bringing up that this is far from the first time you've done something like this with my posts - especially the more outside of the box ones leaving a lot less chance you just magically came up with it too.

You've seriously warmed on me, so I was trying to avoid making it a call out thread, but I'd be more than happy to go down that road considering your response.

Again.

Drek
04-26-2011, 01:59 PM
Are you seriously implying you independently had the same random revelation roughly 12 hours after I posted that (most of that time during the night)?

Do you really want me to start bringing up that this is far from the first time you've done something like this with my posts - especially the more outside of the box ones leaving a lot less chance you just magically came up with it too.

You've seriously warmed on me, so I was trying to avoid making it a call out thread, but I'd be more than happy to go down that road considering your response.

Again.

Nope, I was just returning the ball busting. I will honestly admit that this is something I read in your post before considering how Miller could be used in that way. Not the using him in a 5-2 style front part because really, Wade Phillips was doing something pretty similar with DeMarcus Ware and to me he's a good comp with Ware. That is where I've pictured Miller all along. But that would obviously imply him going to a 3-4 that frequently rushes both OLBs. Your comment did spark the thought of a 4-3 like us using Miller in such a fashion. With someone like Ayers who has DT experience from college, and Doom who has OLB experience from last season, it would be a really interesting possibility.

Though keeping with honesty, I know the previous outside the box thought you're referring to and no, that was not one where I had even seen your previous post on the subject. Turns out it never happened, but it was legitimately separate thought generation.

ant1999e
04-26-2011, 02:04 PM
The Article sums it up... We dont need a Corner.

i prefer building the Front 7 and let the Corners we have (which are a solid group) benefit from (hopefully) better play up front.

2005 Bengals style with Ex Broncos Deltha Oneil and Tory James. Looked like 2 Deion Sanders on the field due to the QB pressure that team was getting.

This. we've had a shutdown corner for the past 7 years and that hasn't gotten us much.

TheReverend
04-26-2011, 02:05 PM
Nope, I was just returning the ball busting. I will honestly admit that this is something I read in your post before considering how Miller could be used in that way. Not the using him in a 5-2 style front part because really, Wade Phillips was doing something pretty similar with DeMarcus Ware and to me he's a good comp with Ware. That is where I've pictured Miller all along. But that would obviously imply him going to a 3-4 that frequently rushes both OLBs. Your comment did spark the thought of a 4-3 like us using Miller in such a fashion. With someone like Ayers who has DT experience from college, and Doom who has OLB experience from last season, it would be a really interesting possibility.

Was that so hard? :giggle:

I will return to being civil.

Though keeping with honesty, I know the previous outside the box thought you're referring to and no, that was not one where I had even seen your previous post on the subject. Turns out it never happened, but it was legitimately separate thought generation.

No chance. You actually argued AGAINST that idea in the thread, only to re-post it a month later as yours. Don't get me wrong, I don't think it was in a vaccuum stolen. I definitely believe that over that month you warmed to the idea after watching AZ's D, and some pre SB interviews as you said.

Either way, arguing about it is pointless. I don't think you're a mindless parrot like so many are, but to see literally the same thing I said a few hours ago recycled like that was definitely a "C'mon man" moment.

TheReverend
04-26-2011, 02:06 PM
Oh and it would and COULD be a very interesting possibility, and if he's the selection I'll be excited to see it in action.

That being said, neither Fox or Allen have shown a tendency to utilize LB's in a fashion anywhere remotely comparable, so I doubt it.

Beantown Bronco
04-26-2011, 02:07 PM
This. we've had a shutdown corner for the past 7 years and that hasn't gotten us much.

Sure it has. More than some teams that have invested every first rounder on the DLine (I'm looking at you Houston).

Taking it further, though, we're not talking about one shutdown corner. We're talking about 2. Where are your comps for that?

TheReverend
04-26-2011, 02:13 PM
Sure it has. More than some teams that have invested every first rounder on the DLine (I'm looking at you Houston).

Taking it further, though, we're not talking about one shutdown corner. We're talking about 2. Where are your comps for that?

Rex has the best CB in the game in Revis, and still has been scouring the NFL for the appropriate #2 complement through Lito Sheppard and now Cromartie.

Clearly he doesn't know how to build a defense.

:rofl:

Drek
04-26-2011, 02:17 PM
No chance. You actually argued AGAINST that idea in the thread, only to re-post it a month later as yours. Don't get me wrong, I don't think it was in a vaccuum stolen. I definitely believe that over that month you warmed to the idea after watching AZ's D, and some pre SB interviews as you said.

Either way, arguing about it is pointless. I don't think you're a mindless parrot like so many are, but to see literally the same thing I said a few hours ago recycled like that was definitely a "C'mon man" moment.

If so then all I can assume is I didn't get your point the first time around or was inebriated in some way because honest to god I didn't recall it.

Oh and it would and COULD be a very interesting possibility, and if he's the selection I'll be excited to see it in action.

That being said, neither Fox or Allen have shown a tendency to utilize LB's in a fashion anywhere remotely comparable, so I doubt it.

It would definitely be interesting, but the lack of Fox or Allen doing it coupled with how well Allen worked with Malcolm Jenkins makes it seem like yet another argument in favor of Peterson to me.

Like I've said I think in this thread. When the off-season started I wanted Peterson. Then I talked myself into Dareus. But now nearing the draft the gut check just tells me Peterson has to be the guy. Picking for need is why Al Davis passed up Calvin Johnson for JaMarcus Russell. Passing up Peterson is the same as if the Lions passed on Johnson to select Gaines Adams.

Gcver2ver3
04-26-2011, 02:18 PM
This. we've had a shutdown corner for the past 7 years and that hasn't gotten us much.

which has me curious on what having two shutdown corners would do...

TheReverend
04-26-2011, 02:23 PM
Picking for need is why Al Davis passed up Calvin Johnson for JaMarcus Russell, and Fitzgerald for Gallery, and Fabian Washington over Aaron Rogers and....

Expanded

elsid13
04-26-2011, 02:33 PM
Not when you are paying someone #2 overall money. I expect the person taken to have an immediate impact...

Then Peterson is the only player that fits the bill for you. Rookie DTs don't have big impact coming into the league, they need to learn techinque and leverage because the offense linemen are 100X better then what they faced in collage.

baja
04-26-2011, 04:11 PM
Baja- your streak is going to end this year then. I think its likely that we take Miller. Now if a trade down occurs (unlikely) then anyone is fair game. Still its doubtful that we take PP.




Yeah it is scary when teams go 4-5 wide and we have champ and PP and cox and whoever else out there.



You want to know what else is scary?
When a team is on 4th down, 4/5 wide and needs 20+ yards and a 6'6 290 lb QB runs for 40+ yards against us.

JAMARCUS RUSSELL anyone!?!?





Pass defense means **** when you can not stop the run. Ask the bengals and their star CBs what they think about pass and run d...or any player or any coach in the leauge. You run the ball and stop the run. Not run the ball and stop the pass.

I don't think we take Peterson @ 2!

I think we trade with Arizona so they can jump Buffalo and take a QB, I think we get Peterson at 5. Besides who ays we need to get a big fat run stuffer at 2, there will be plenty in the second round.

mhgaffney
04-26-2011, 04:22 PM
Peterson might be there at #5.

DarkHorse
04-26-2011, 04:35 PM
Then Peterson is the only player that fits the bill for you. Rookie DTs don't have big impact coming into the league, they need to learn techinque and leverage because the offense linemen are 100X better then what they faced in collage.

Stay tuned for the obvious Suh response in


3......


2......


1......

DarkHorse
04-26-2011, 04:37 PM
which has me curious on what having two shutdown corners would do...

With actual talent at the DC position along with a defensive minded HC that is putting the defense and it's players back in positions that fit them?


mmmmmmm i'm salivating

elsid13
04-26-2011, 04:52 PM
Stay tuned for the obvious Suh response in


3......


2......


1......

Outlier.

Los Broncos
04-26-2011, 05:16 PM
He wont be any good if we cant get pressure up front.

TheReverend
04-26-2011, 05:20 PM
He wont be any good if we cant get pressure up front.

I swear my ****ing head is going to explode.

Chris
04-26-2011, 05:26 PM
I swear my ****ing head is going to explode.

So you're saying we should go DL.

elsid13
04-26-2011, 05:27 PM
I swear my ****ing head is going to explode.

Make sure you get a video of it, because we need a new smilie on the board.

DarkHorse
04-26-2011, 05:28 PM
lol

DarkHorse
04-26-2011, 05:29 PM
Outlier.

Uh-oh all the "Suh is a demigod" after one season people are going to get you

SureShot
04-26-2011, 05:29 PM
This this is pure awesome, would read again.

elsid13
04-26-2011, 05:43 PM
Uh-oh all the "Suh is a demigod" after one season people are going to get you

Let be honest, Suh was freak and very successful as a rookie. That doesn't happen for 99.9% of the players coming into the league playing DT.

DarkHorse
04-26-2011, 05:53 PM
Let be honest, Suh was freak and very successful as a rookie. That doesn't happen for 99.9% of the players coming into the league playing DT.

Correct but my thing with Suh is - great FIRST season. Doesn't make him out to be the 2nd coming of Christ when talking about DT's after ONE season.


Let's see if anyone even remembers this guy in 5 years. People put entirely too much stock into rookies coming into this game. Even the Dareus/Peterson/Miller debate seems to be leaning towards "who can make an instant impact" versus "who can be productive over a period of time".

Suh was a beast his first year in the league - i'm fine with saying that.

Suh is a beast, the best in the game - yeah, not so much for me.

elsid13
04-26-2011, 06:00 PM
Correct but my thing with Suh is - great FIRST season. Doesn't make him out to be the 2nd coming of Christ when talking about DT's after ONE season.


Let's see if anyone even remembers this guy in 5 years. People put entirely too much stock into rookies coming into this game. Even the Dareus/Peterson/Miller debate seems to be leaning towards "who can make an instant impact" versus "who can be productive over a period of time".

Suh was a beast his first year in the league - i'm fine with saying that.

Suh is a beast, the best in the game - yeah, not so much for me.

You are correct. The teams now have film on him and will adjust to what he does well and where he struggles. Great players will overcome the adjustments and still dominate, most players won't.

Bronco Rob
04-27-2011, 06:51 AM
:thumbs: