Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

And this is why Todd McShay/ESPN is incompetent...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • TonyR
    replied
    Originally posted by Gutless Drunk View Post
    Oh...I didn't go back far enough to know we were hypothetically losing everyone!
    lol, hopefully we don't. But a possibility with both of them unfortunately.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gutless Drunk
    replied
    Originally posted by TonyR View Post
    If we lose Decker and Welker then Caldwell is 2nd instead of 4th. Hence the suggestion that we would possibly need an upgrade in said hypothetical.
    Oh...I didn't go back far enough to know we were hypothetically losing everyone!

    Leave a comment:


  • TonyR
    replied
    Originally posted by Gutless Drunk View Post
    As a 4th receiver? You can do a lot worse then Bubba Caldwell, take a gander at some rosters.
    If we lose Decker and Welker then Caldwell is 2nd instead of 4th. Hence the suggestion that we would possibly need an upgrade in said hypothetical.

    Leave a comment:


  • CHEF LUIGI
    replied
    sorry, decker isnt even our #3 receiver option, why would we give him #2 money?
    welker and both thomas's are more valuable to our O than decker.
    decker is our #4 most valuable receiver.
    If his agent thinks ED is worth #2 money then he may as well list his home in denver !

    Leave a comment:


  • ludo21
    replied
    Decker will get #2 money, what is that going for?

    Leave a comment:


  • Requiem
    replied
    Originally posted by Lestat View Post
    I don't think losing Decker is as forgone a conclusion as some think. I just don't think he is going to get the coin everyone expects.
    With that said, even if we do lose him there is little need to draft a WR in the first. Unless a DT type is there(by that I mean franchise WR potential and not just size).
    I really don't see us losing him either. Most of the guys we need to retain like Harris will come cheap on RFA tenders or decent deals. Very few guys are deserving of lucrative extensions that would take up cap space. At least for 2014, 2015 is different.

    Leave a comment:


  • IndelibleScribe
    replied
    I don't think losing Decker is as forgone a conclusion as some think. I just don't think he is going to get the coin everyone expects.
    With that said, even if we do lose him there is little need to draft a WR in the first. Unless a DT type is there(by that I mean franchise WR potential and not just size).

    Leave a comment:


  • broncocalijohn
    replied
    Originally posted by yerner View Post
    I don't see anything wrong with that opinion. Right now they're rolling out Bubba Caldwell. Nobody thinks that can't be improved? Factor in Decker's free agency and it could be something we draft again like last year with King.
    Decker >>>>>>>>>>> Caldwell

    Not even close. If we stuck Bubba out there every week, he would be covered much better. Caldwell did great but he isn't a replacement. We have many weapons on offense but he wouldn't be one of them.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gutless Drunk
    replied
    Originally posted by yerner View Post
    I don't see anything wrong with that opinion. Right now they're rolling out Bubba Caldwell. Nobody thinks that can't be improved?
    As a 4th receiver? You can do a lot worse then Bubba Caldwell, take a gander at some rosters.

    Leave a comment:


  • yerner
    replied
    I don't see anything wrong with that opinion. Right now they're rolling out Bubba Caldwell. Nobody thinks that can't be improved? Factor in Decker's free agency and it could be something we draft again like last year with King.

    Leave a comment:


  • CHEF LUIGI
    replied
    decker is highly replacable.
    anything more than 3 large, i say let him walk.

    Leave a comment:


  • Requiem
    replied
    Originally posted by Mat'hir Uth Gan View Post
    No idea what the rest of the article says, but I like Zack Martin as a LG quite a bit. Late 1st would be stretching it for me, but Martin makes a ton of sense in the late 2nd. Beadles is gone, and Martin projects as a vastly more talented and athletic Beadles. I don't see him as an OT at all though.

    All that being said, I'm not sure I'd prioritize an OG in the first three rounds. Chris Clark could kick inside to LG for a year, he's earned the playing time, and we can get a mid-round guy to sit and learn on the bench.
    Agreed. However, I would take Bryan Stork (C) in the third if he was one of the better options.

    Leave a comment:


  • sgbfan
    replied
    Originally posted by theAPAOps5 View Post
    Long snapper at 32..... Do it Broncos.

    I take more issue with the fact that they have us drafting at 31. They are saying we lose in the Super Bowl.
    They are going based off record I assume. Broncos don't have the best record in the nfl, so they aren't 32.

    Leave a comment:


  • CHEF LUIGI
    replied
    this is about hating on todd mcshay, stay on topic !

    Leave a comment:


  • Mat'hir Uth Gan
    replied
    No idea what the rest of the article says, but I like Zack Martin as a LG quite a bit. Late 1st would be stretching it for me, but Martin makes a ton of sense in the late 2nd. Beadles is gone, and Martin projects as a vastly more talented and athletic Beadles. I don't see him as an OT at all though.

    All that being said, I'm not sure I'd prioritize an OG in the first three rounds. Chris Clark could kick inside to LG for a year, he's earned the playing time, and we can get a mid-round guy to sit and learn on the bench.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X