Mile High Report: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Around SBN: Favre to the Jets Bar-right-arrows



The Broncos - The Naked Truth

Warning!  This is going to be a long read!

A lot has changed between the end of the '08 season and today.  We knew we had 8 draft picks, and we knew our needs.  We also knew that Denver would avoid expensive FAs and go for a "youth core building" approach.

However, Denver has made quite a few FA moves, picking up several mid level talent players as stop gaps, and several of them are actualy improvements in the positions they are in.

We also let an offensive lineman go who provided depth at two OL positions in exchange for yet another pick.  If Denver trades down in the draft (as most MHR members seem to predict), we may end up with 10 or 11 picks.

Let's analyze the naked truth about where we stand as a team and figure out our future in '08.

I'm going to take a slightly different approach to the draft than the many draft experts at MHR.  I'm not a draft expert, but I know a little about football.  What I want to do with this article is to pretend I'm the head coach of Denver, while you the reader are the general manager.  I'm going to give you my assesment as a coach (being ignorant of what is available in the draft), and I want you to make the adjustments to get what you can based on my input.

Remember, this isn't the Mike Shanahan show.  You alone will make the final call on how we draft.  I'm just going to give you my input as a coach.  You are free to accept or reject my input in different areas because in our pretend world I only run the team, while you have complete control over the front office and personnel.

I'll give my current report on the state of the depth chart below the fold, and tell you what I advise.  Just click on the "read more" button below.  Ready?  Let's have some fun!

Star-divide

Let's start with my favorite team in all of football:  The Defense!

Safeties

At the end of the season I really wanted Phillips in the draft.  His stock has fallen a little, but more importantly we made some key additions in FA.

Starting with free safety, we have Manuel to compete with Hamza for the starting position.  Both players are coverage guys and are expected to play deep zone.  Denver thought enough of Manuel to give him a 3 yr contract, even with Hamza showing flashes of brilliance.

Over at strong safety we picked up McCree to play along with Lynch.  McCree (like Lynch) is a box safety who won't play much deep zone coverage, but has better speed than Lynch.  Lynch still has the edge in football smarts (perhaps the best in the league) and is still a hard hitter.  I expect Lynch and Mcree to rotate (with Lynch playing on expected run plays).

My opinion - Don't get any more safeties.  We finally have depth at the position, and finally have true safeties playing the position instead of SAF/CB hybrids.  I rate the SAF position right now as a "B"

Cornerbacks

Two of the best CBs in the league are in Denver.  Bailey and Bly got burned a couple of times, but the also didn't have a reliable front seven and didn't have much help with only one SAF behind them (Lynch was mostly in the box).  I think the front seven will be improved, the system will be more aggressive for the front seven, and despite still having a SAF in the box, our SAF position will be better too.  This means more production for the dynamic duo.

Add in Paymah and Foxworth for depth (and allowing Foxworth to concentrate on CB instead of pulling double duty at SAF) and we have an excellent group at CB.

My opinion - Don't get anymore CBs.  We have an elite and deep crew as it is.  I rate the CB squad as an "A+"

Defensive Ends

Doom is the real deal, and may well be one of the top five DEs in the league right now.  Lurking in the shadows is Jarvis Moss, a first round pick that sat out his first year with an injury.  If he shows the production that matches his potential the Broncos are in for a treat in the pass rush.  Add in solid players like Crowder, Engleberger, and Ekuban and the Broncos have a great group of very young and very talented DEs, both in terms of pass rush and run stopping specialists.

An added benefit is the Broncos ability to rotate DEs without losing an edge in talent on the field.

My opinion - Don't get anymore DEs.  The level of talent and the depth is something to be excited about.  "A"

Outside Linebackers

There is no doubt that DJ Williams will tear up the weakside.  His speed and agility are gifts in blitzing the blindside of right handed QBs, and SD (who oddly loves the weakside run) will have to deal with a former MLB who was second in the league in tackles last year.  His speed also allows him to play the common weak zone of WILL linebackers effectively.  If he hadn't been bumped by Gold (who was returning from TB at the time), Williams would have been a monster at WILL.

On the other side, Denver decided to take the SAM linbacker position seriously and obtained a linebacker in FA who is built for the position.  Again, Denver went with speed.  Boss Bailey doesn't dominate the position, but he can hold his own with most TEs in coverage (relieving of us of the slow, box strong safety problem).  With his brother already on the team, this may help Denver with the team identity problem they have faced, and might serve to bring the defensive team together.

Winborn has the speed to be an adequate back-up at WILL for Williams.  Webster was a punching bag for many pundits last year (including me), but he seemed to improve enough to stay on as a back-up player.  He is a reasonable, if not great, back-up with starting experience.

My opinion - Don't get anymore OLBs.  We have two good starters, and two back-ups with starting experience.  (Those back-ups should be a help on special teams too).  "B+"

Middle Linbacker

K2 (no, I'm not going to try to spell his name) comes in as a mystery to most people.  A lot of folks (including your truly) wanted to leave DJ at MLB.  But K2 (sounds like a mountain huh?) has a terrific resume if you check it out.  According to MHR's famous sports writer Styg50, Seatle hated to part with K2 because they considered him a true starter stuck in a depth position.  K2 is also more of a vocal leader than DJ, and a speedster as well.  Is he an improvement over DJ?  Probably not.  But if he is even close to being a good MLB (and I think he will be), the overall improvement of the LB crew should be excellent.

Our problem?  Depth.  Who in the heck is "Beck"?  Some folks may think DJ could cover for an injured K2, with Winborn covering for DJ.  While possible, this is a nightmare scenario for midseason.  All of DJ's preparation will be for WILL, and a midseason switch is tougher than one might think.  We really need someone who can back up K2 and hold his own.

My opinion - K2 will be a good addition for the team.  At worse he will fill in pretty well until a draft pick pans out.  At best, he will be the MLB that Seatle thinks he can be, and give us a return to the "three speedster LB" crew Denver fans used to enjoy.  What is killing us is the lack of depth if K2 went down or doesn't work out.  We need to pursue a MLB in the draft.  "B-"

Defensive Tackles

Here comes our first major problem.  The hope is that young Thomas at left DT will prove to be an effective DT.  He isn't a dominating force, but he is decent and expected to improve as he ages.  McKinley is a decent rotational DT on the right, but it is questionable if he should start.  The jury is out on Peterson, Mallard, and Harris.

As in most 4-3 systems, one dominating DT makes the other DT look good.  You don't have to have two supermen at the position (though it would be nice).  But you really need to have one, and Denver doesn't.  You really can't put all of your (Easter) eggs in one basket in this critical position, so...

My opinion - Spend at least two high draft picks on this position.  It is the weakness of our defense right now, and it killed us last year.  We must get this position right.  "D"

Ok, time for another famous hoosierteacher intermission:

Now you may think that I am being a sexist pig by putting up this picture, but I assure you that I am not.  This picture is a very important part of the article at hand.  These lovely ladies were the defensive tackles for Denver in '07.  Note the shoes, which didn't help much.  This may be why we got ran over in running yards allowed.  In fact, I think the '07 DTs deserve to get spanked, and I should be the guy to do it.

Ok, I'm a little off topic I guess.  On to the offense.

Quarterbacks

Cutler is clearly the future of this franchise.  Ramsey is a decent back-up.  Hackney may have blown his job by getting in a little trouble recently, but he may have dodged a bullet because he hasn't been fired yet.

My opinion - Are you kidding me?  "A"

Running backs

Henry kept his promise and hasn't been in trouble since joining the team.  He dominated opponents before being injured, and a false positive drug test made fans suspicious of Henry's value.  As the only power back on the team, Henry is important for a team that loves to change up power and speed and play a "run by committee" approach.  Henry showed a lot of class by being a team player, and took a pay cut to stay with the coach who stood by his side during the test fiasco.

Young and Hall are both speedy runners who stepped up when Henry went down.

My opinion - Don't get more RBs.  Denver has the right type of runners, and has them in spades (if you count our RB/FB hybrids, we have even more depth).  "A"

Fullbacks

Sapp was resigned because he fits Denver's plans.  Denver doesn't believe in true FBs.  Griffith was the closest thing, and even he wasn't a true FB.  Denver (like many teams), is getting away from the FB position and transitioning slowly to depth at TE.  Denver likes to use RBs who are not starters for use at FB.  The best blocker in the non-starting group of RBs gets the "honor".  Used primarily to block or go out for screens (and rarely for a "dive" play), Denver has no need for FB depth.  They would rather have five or six RBs and count the last one or two as FBs on the depth chart.

My opinion - No way in heck should Denver pursue a FB in today's NFL (or in Denver's system).  "n/a"

Wide Receivers

Problem area number two.  We have an excellent #1 possession WR in Brandon Marshall.  He will only continue to improve.  His strengths are run blocking, yards gained after contact with a defender, and great hands.  Our slot receiver is in the same mold as Marshall, but older.  Stokely is perhaps the best slot receiver in the NFL, and his only weakness is that he is not an every down player (so he can't play at #2).  Martinez gives us adequate depth.

Denver signed question marks with Colbert and Shepherd.  Colbert may work out, but Shepherd is probably an experiment for special team returns.

The issue is really the #2 spot, which is vacant.  Marshall is revered by Denver fans, and rightly so.  But from this coach's perspective we need to be careful.  Marshall will now face the #1 CBs of opposing teams instead of #2s.  And if we don't have a threat at #2 receiver you can bet that Marshall will get double coverage.  oakland has recently aquired Deangelo Hall, a CB that is a real threat twice a year for Denver.  If Denver doesn't get this position right for '08, Marshall will have to carry a heavy load for the team.

My opinion - Just like the DT position, spend two high picks on WR.  I'm not the draft guy that many of our terrific readers and regular contributers are, but I'm prepared to throw in my endorsement for Bennet in this year's draft.

Current players - "A"
With the void at #2 - "C-"

Offensive Center

Nalen might have retired last year, but he is sticking around for another year.  He was injured for just about all of '07, and is a potential injury risk in '08.  However, he has been the heart of this O-line and I expect him (if healthy) to give us one more good year.  

Denver made a terrific move getting Wiegmann from KC.  KC had a terrible O-line last year, but I don't believe Wiegmann was at fault.  Wiegmann was a key part of previous years when KC had a good line, and I think he is a better fit for Denver than KC at any rate.  He is an older player, and is signed for 2 years as an effective (but temporary) stop gap.

My opinion - We have two older guys (but good guys) right now.  One may get injured, and both are near retirement.  We should spend two late round picks to get the type of O-linemen that fit our system that other teams overlook.  Keep in mind that zone block linemen benefit from learning the system for one to three years before starting in most cases.

"B+"

Offensive guards

Hamilton is a great guard, but a very high injury risk with the potential for concussions.  He has good support with Kuper as a probable starter and Holland backing up both players.

My opinion - Denver could use youth to push the vets here.  I expect Hamilton to retire at year's end (if he doesn't get forced out by injury before then).  Two late round picks may end up as effective starters in the next two to three years.

"B+"

Offensive Tackle

Here's a weird problem.  According to word from the team, Harris is a superstar and a quick study.  The team is eager to get him on the field.  And Pears will be the other starter.  Some are critical of Pears, but I share Styg's assesment of Pears being a decent starter.  There is no real depth behind these guys.  The problem?  You really don't want to draft someone to be a young back-up to two young starters.  Remember the importance of staggering ages for purposes of timing retirments, as well as spreading out salary packages.

My opinion - Do not draft an OT.  Instead, sign a decent FA that is reasonably priced to back-up.  We could go for Clady in the first round (and it wouldn't grieve me), but I would rather get the extra picks and address our needs that way.

"B+"

Tight Ends

Graham is perhaps the best blocking TE in the League.  He had decent hands in limited pass opportunities this year, but he is said to look better in practice.  Whether or not his catching catches on, he is a very valuable weapon on the line.  Scheffler is a terrific receiving TE, and a common target for Cutler.  Mustard is well rounded (leans towards blocking), and in my opinion he is very underrated.  He'll back up Graham.  Jackson is a convert from receiver, and not an effective blocker.  He can back-up Scheff, but is average.

My opinion - We have an awesome set of starting TEs.  Our depth is also good.  No need to add to this group.

"A"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

We have the following picks:

1,2,4,4,5,5,6 (recent trade with HOU; We gave up Myers),7,7 for 9 picks.

Let's say we trade our 1 for a lower 1 and (perhaps) a 3.  This gives us 1,2,3,4,4,5,5,6,7,7 which is 10 picks.

We might also go with something like trading our 1 for a high 2, a 4, and a 5 for 11 picks.  Who knows what will really happen?  (Not being educated on the reality of who is available to draft, and all things being equal, I would pick WR and DT with our 2s; DT,WR, and MLB with our 4s; MLB, OC, and OG with the 5s; OG at 6; and OC, K/P at 7s.  I know this is oversimplifying, but I'm counting on the general manager to put it into a workable model.

We may even trade our multiple low picks for a few mid rounders.

A few members are hoding out hope that we trade up to get a favorite player, and given Shanahan's reputation for aggressively trading to get what he wants, this is a possibility.

My desire (from a coaching standpoint) is to see us get 2 DTs and 2 WRs early in the draft because these positions will kill our team if we don't get at least one DT and one WR right.

In the middle of the draft, we need one MLB to shore up the LB crew in case of an unforseen injury.

We also need guards and centers in the near future, and we better be getting them now and getting them a couple of years in "zone block" school.  If we wait until we really need them it will be too late.  We can also spend any extra picks on a kicker or punter.

I'm only guessing, but playing the odds (and most likely worst case scenario) I think we get four very good players out of a draft of 10 or 11 picks.  2 or 3 additional players may end up as special teams types that won't start.  Again, it is critical that at least two of those be a DT and a WR (in my opinion).

A general manager can take this analysis and look at the draft point card and the players available and come up with a plan.  It may match the coach's desires closely, but more likely the effective manager will have to make some major modifications to do the best for the team, and the coach needs to take what the general manager can do for him.

By firing Sundquist (we all know that is what really went down), Shanahan has an opportunity with multiple draft picks to build a long term, youthful, core group of players that can rise to the top and stay there for a long time to come, and to take all of the credit for it as well.  I like Mike, and I liked Sundquist too.  The Sundquist move surprised me.  But the timing was brilliant on Shanahan's part.  It's a gamble, but Mike's record show he is right more often than wrong.

With the stop gap players Shanahan has brought in, he has freed up the many picks we have to target fewer key positions.  Again, brilliant.  Perhaps Sundquist was the one building for a winning team every year, and Shanahan really wanted to go this route all along (build a core group in the draft and be more patient).  Again, who knows?

But by throwing the real coach out for a moment, and looking at my analysis, you can do a couple of fun things.

  • Discuss what you agree or disagree with.  (My thoughts are just opinions here, and I know some of you can improve on what I wrote up).
  • Or you can take my thoughts and develop a draft plan.
  • Or you can argue the grades I gave.
Have at it!
Poll
Denver should...
  • 1. Trade up from the 12th pick in the first round
  • 2. Trade down from the 12th pick in the first round
  • 3. Pick with the 12th pick in the first round

  192 votes | Results

0 recs | Comment 69 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Display:

Say...
...doesn't that naked guy look a little like Jake Plummer?

A lot of good promoted diaries can get the naked guy bumped off of the front page pretty quick.  Get to work gang!

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by hoosierteacher on Mar 23, 2008 11:25 PM MDT   0 recs

Plummer
The picture is from The Onion and is titled- "Denver Broncos Fined $25,000 For Running Truly Naked Bootleg" so it's supposed to look like Plummer. It would have been fitting for your Football University post on the bootleg.

by Jack on Mar 24, 2008 7:10 PM MDT to parent up   0 recs

Yes, it would have been perfect!
Unfortunatly I didn't find it until a day later.  I wasn't going to go with a picture for a story entitled "State of the Broncos; Pre-Draft".  But when I stumbled on the picture I retitled the article to use the picture.  It was just too funny to save for somewhere else!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by hoosierteacher on Mar 24, 2008 8:02 PM MDT to parent up   0 recs

hot d-tackles
i say we bring back the 4 players pictured, and who cares if we win or lose? seriously though, great article, and i agree with most of what you're saying. the biggest question i have is of potential. 4 new defensive players have not played a down yet for this team, yet are slated as starters-lb, or part-time players, at least-safeties. thomas-1, moss-0, and crowder-1 are all still to be determined, and hamza will  effectively be playing in his second year, too. that's 8 guys that are basically unproven to me, just on defense! dt's, winborn, ekuban(out),... and well, i'm just not trusting everyone to be healthy/play to their potential next season. on offense, the o-line is the most pressing need with 3 potential starters coming off season-ending injuries, hopefully, and a rookie protecting cutler's blind side. yes, we need a receiver, also, but with the tight ends we have i'm comfortable with 1 pick on a receiver, along with colbert and martinez. i would go dt with pick 1, then ot in the 2nd, mlb(not sold on nk2) and receiver in the 4th, another dt in the 5th, safety and og in the 6th, and kicker+punter in the 7th to provide competition. the rest, i would get some veterans for depth, we could use some. boy, we have a lot of needs, don't we? of course, this could all change depending on who becomes available in fa/cuts, but barring anymore pre-draft signings, i would go with this basic plan. whew! anyone else?

by davecheffy on Mar 24, 2008 1:34 AM MDT   0 recs

Good stuff dave
While several players only had a year or less to establish themselves, I think some of them looked pretty decent in that time.  In my opinion, given the number of needs we have, we really have to fill known needs first and then shore up positions where we have good (but perhaps short resume) players.

Thomas was probably our best looking DT all season, even though it took awhile for the team to figure out that the big name FAs were busts so that Thomas could get a chance.

Moss is a question mark, but he is going to get a shot to compete for a starting position.  In his case it is kind of like getting a first round pick all over again, just a year late.  As I alluded to in the article, if he works out that is awesome, but we should have terrific depth even if he is a bust.

I think Crowder has already established himself.  He is more of a run stopper, and those guys don't get the kind of stats that get fans excited.  But he serves a valuable role in rotation, and I believe he did well enough for some fans to speculate that he may even switch to DT (which I respectfuly think is a terrible idea).

Ekuban was absent as you point out, but is considered a strong enough player to have received an extension recently.  Like Crowder he is a run stopper, so he doesn't look pretty with blitzes and big plays.  But he ties up the line effectively and limits run routes for the opposition when he is on the field.

It's fair to question Hamza, but he did have a good first year.  He was one of our leading tacklers, and had the rare ability to be an effective tackler against large runners as well as having the speed to play pass coverage.  While you can't be sure if his first year was a true indication of his future, He did all he could to establish himself.  Even if he is a false flash, we still have Manuel to compete for a starting position in camp.  The back-up should be a boost on STs coverage teams.

Winborn will be a back-up to DJ, and should be a non-factor unless DJ goes down.  He should be a boost to STs coverage units, but he did get enough starting time to be an "adequate back-up" (which is why one is a back-up in the first place).

While you may not be as comfortable with K2 as I am, we both advocate the same plan; we both want a MLB in the fourth round.

At receiver more than any other position (save DT) I am looking at actual game planning and play options.  I strongly feel that people will blame Marshall for a poor season if we don't get him the help that he needs.  Martinez is not a #2 receiver, and Colbert is an untested quality "in Denver".  In the common sets with one TE our man Scheffler will help Marshall, but his routes will more often be on the same side of the field as Marshall's.  Also, they are both going to threaten the same range (short to midfield).  The addition of a WR in the draft with potential star power not only makes Marshall look good, it gives us a 1, 2, 3 punch the likes of which only INDY has had (with the same Stokely in slot).

If we don't trade our first (and from your post it looks you aren't) I doubt an elite DT falls to 12th.  In that case, we should go with OT Clady if available.  OT C. Williams (from Vandy) looks enticing, but I don't know what kind of feet a 320 pound guy can have for the ZB.  I think there would be several DT options in the 2nd round.

I really like how you went about planning your picks.  While I may be scheming based on too much optimism, I really like a coach (or general manager) who makes their plans based on "worst case scenario" thinking.  You very well may be the voice of reason during a reloading season when many of us can get caught up being too hopeful.  I wouldn't want a "yes" man for my general manager.  Great job!

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by hoosierteacher on Mar 24, 2008 6:28 AM MDT to parent up   0 recs

What about the return game?
Top notch analysis on the offense and the defense and the areas that need to be improved via the draft, but no mention was made of a returner that can actually scare other teams.  

The bushel of 2nd day picks should be enough to find a returner or two.  If the returner is good enough, we could even draft one at a position that is well stocked, like CB.  Drafting 2 LBs should really help the coverage teams and at least one of the 2 WRs drafted should be able to make a contribution to special teams.

by Arctic Bronco on Mar 24, 2008 3:02 AM MDT   0 recs

Special teams
I think Hall and Martinez should be adequate for returns, and I imagine we'll end up with enough depth at several positions to have competition for returners.  With added depth we should also have better coverage.

The catch (and I left this out of the article) is our "wonderful" STs coach, who is supposed to have a good rep, but I haven't seen good STs play yet.  I almost thought about jokingly requesting a new STs coach in the draft.  I feel that Bates at defensive coord deserved more time to prove himself than our STs guy.

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by hoosierteacher on Mar 24, 2008 5:47 AM MDT to parent up   0 recs

you know that...
that I wanted O'Brien fired after kicking to Hester.  I still can't believe that fool is still there.
fader nation is a conquered nation

by mdierk on Mar 24, 2008 9:33 AM MDT to parent up   0 recs

I definitely
don't think the problem is O'brien.  I wish I could explain it though.  I read an article about when Obrien was signed and Kieth Burns attributed the bad ST play pre-obrien to Players not understanding the significance of that aspect of teh game.  Basically they were more worried about cracking starting lineups than busting wedges.

Burns goes on to say that Obrien changed that and that his most impressive quality was that he ALWAYS knew what was going on and when and how and why.  If true (and I wouldn't call Kieth Burns a liar, not to his face anyways) than that is a quality in a coach we should be grateful for.  Our ST play picked up, but without a dangerous returner it never really impressed.  

It went bad again after Burns left the field.  Maybe it was because Burns and obrien thought alike, and Burns was the critical link between what obrien was instructing and the players executing on the field.  I'm not saying that we need a leader on the field during special teams plays.  I think it is more about having a REASON to believe on the field.  Burns attitude and the fact he was out there with the unit probably made them BELIEVE that what they were doing was going to have an impact, because he never let them forget it and did his reminding on the field.  I think a similar effect could be had with a great returner, since everytime the unit goes on the field they have a REASON to believe they are about to do something great.  I think Saurbraun was not appreciated by his teammates last year, and that it had a reverse effect on them from the above situation.  When you feel like, despite your best effort you will still be let down by your leader, it is hard to give everything you've got.

I'm with Arctic in doing our best to acquire a dangerous skillset for kick returns.  By dropping saurbrun we lose the ill-performing leader, so our gunners probably need to step up, but at least it is better than a step backwards....

I wish my sig was as cool as mdierks!

by styg50 on Mar 24, 2008 3:37 PM MDT to parent up   0 recs

Special Teams
     Well, whether anyone thinks so or not, ST are vital in football.  Field position is dictated by ST play.  One of the greatest plays in football is when punt team downs the ball near the goalline/inside the +10.  That's why returners must make up their little minds-get under it or get away from it!  The problem w/ST in '07 wasn't the returner (Hixon is a Giant now, unfortunately), it was the lack of blocking.  Let's face it.  It isn't rocket science.  Right return, left return or middle return and maybe some kind of gimmick reverse on KOR.  Anything more is just too complicated.  We fans could help out by valuing ST instead of saying, "Oh, he's just a backup/special teamer."  When Nikos Koutouvides was signed, some said that just because he was a great special teams player didn't mean he would be OK at MLB.  What does it take to play ST?  Let's see, running, blocking and tackling.  Wow, isn't that just basic football?  When kick or kick return is lined up, it's still football!  Terrell Davis was a 6th round pick who made the team because he was a beast on ST.  So, as I watched the '07 season, I saw ST not running their lanes and in the Chicago game, what part of "Don't kick it to Hester in the middle of the freaking field!" do you think Sauerbrun didn't get?  Was that the ST game from Hell, or what?  All of this stuff is fixable and it will probably be much improved.  Position coaches in the NFL often remark about how hard NFL players are to coach.  In fact, I know of a Bronco coach who said of the older, more experienced players, "You can't coach them, you can only correct them because they think they know everything."  That's why young players acquired in the draft and CFA are desirable over high-priced FAs.  Take a look at the Giants' '07 draft.  All of the rookies made the team and, I think they all played with the possible exception of one on IR?  Well, for Bronco ST in '08, drag out the film and start correcting;  there is much to do.  I'm just saying.    

by dardarsh on Mar 24, 2008 4:44 PM MDT to parent up   0 recs

Good points
I have always been a little peeved by the "just a kicker" traditional talk.  Denver has had some terrific kickers who have won games in a clutch, and it's a high pressure position to play.

In fact, many of our games this year where won and lost by STs.

But I still hold to my dislike of O'Brien.  While he is considered a quality STs coach, I didn't see it translate to the team.  The same could be said of Bates on the defense, but I had assumed that the transition to his system would take place fully a little over halfway through the season.  We dropped his scheme before then, and dropped him before a second season.  It was hard to watch us lose those games, but a major transition (like one to the Bates system) requires more patience than most fans (and apparently Mike) can endure.  But O'Brien's people weren't executing in any facet of the game (coverage or returns), and (other than the Toro plays) seemed sloppy at best.

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by hoosierteacher on Mar 24, 2008 7:02 PM MDT to parent up   0 recs

Using Drafttek
I hear what you're saying coach, and I agree.  Try this mock on for size and let me know what you think.

49ers get #12 and #140
Denver gets #29, #39 and #103

First thing's first, let's trade down in the 1st.  I think our best fit is to deal with San Fran.  The Niners should be looking to snag an OT with their top choice and they could have their pick of the litter (sans Jake Long) if they moved up to our spot, so I think it's a reasonable move for them.  For us, it helps me target more of the guys I really like.  Of course, this is fair by the universally recognized draft pick Value Chart.  And now, on to the picks (using the most recent DraftTek.com mock as a guide)

#29 - Curtis Lofton, ILB, Oklahoma
Call me crazy, but I can't get over this guy.  He's going to be DeMeco Ryans all over again and I want that.  K2 could well be a reasonable starter, but what's the harm in bringing in some solid competition that, at worst, gives us great depth?  Other options here are Jerod Mayo (Al Wilson version 2.0?) and Dan Connor, both ILB that could play outside in a pinch.

#39 - Pat Sims, DT, Auburn
This is probably my favorite DT in the second tier.  He's an active, big body with great upside.  If he passes the interview test, he'll be a great choice.  Another way to go here is Trevor Laws (DT, Notre Dame) but I personally like Sims more.

#43 - Earl Bennett, WR, Vanderbilt
On his own, Bennett is worth a high pick.  He was the lone star on a mediocre team and managed to shine despite all that.  That said, he has a history with our young, franchise QB and that's for the better.

#103 - Josh Barrett, SS, Arizona State
I tend to fall for triangle numbers and measurables, so I'm torn about this pick.  I think I might instead go with Craig Steltz (S, LSU) who is quite the opposite.  With Lynch on the verge of retirement and McCree on a one-year deal, getting a potential future starter that can contribute on special teams in the meantime seems reasonable.

#104 - DeMario Pressley, DT, NC State
As pretty as those DTs were last year, I think we'll need some more beef up front if we expect to contend anytime soon.  Pressley certainly fits that bill.  He might be more of a boom or bust type prospect, but considering the rest of this draft, I think that's a fair gamble.

#115 - Dexter Jackson, WR/KR, Appalachian State
With Bennett in tow to compete for that #2 WR spot with Colbert, Jackson would push Glenn Martinez for the 4th/5th slot at WR and on kick returns.  Special teams is where he can really pay off, as I think he could be the next big thing back there.

#130 - Ezra Butler, OLB, Nevada
I know we don't need an OLB, but this guy may be too good in terms of value to pass on.  At worst, he can be a heat-seeking missile on special teams.  He's awfully raw, but he's a physical freak and at this point in the draft, why not?

#140 - Erik Ainge, QB, Tennessee
OK, here's a real curveball.  Yes, we have our franchise QB, so we can pretty much forget this spot.  And yes, we have a decent veteran back-up to boot.  But here's the thing, Cutler is now on his own and the training wheels are off, so perhaps we should look for a more permanent solution behind him.  My big thing with this pick is simple: can you really get better value than this guy at this spot?  

#174 - Frank Okam, DT, Texas
If one is needed, two is good, three is better, no?  Sims and Pressley have their question marks, as does Okam.  My theory here is, with enough question marks, we're bound to get the right answer at least once!  Here's yet another guy that was in the first round mix just last year (Pressley was another), but they've fallen for dubious reasons.

Alright, I'm going to stop there because I have to run and I don't think there are any wonderful picks left to be made.  Steve Justice (OC, Wake Forrest) looks to be gone in the third, so he's trapped in our no-pick land.  He'd be a great fit and I hope we can do something to get him.  I agree that OT is best adressed in free agency (this year's Montrae Holland?) and OG is a toss up.  So, what do you think?

by ejruiz on Mar 24, 2008 8:01 AM MDT   0 recs

Nice, ej
I don't see the Ainge pick as that far-fetched. Shanny has stated before that he likes to pick a QB every other year, if for no other reason than as eventual trade-bait. Then again, he also said he'd be very reluctant to pick a QB in rd 1, too.

If they could swing 3 DT's and still get those 2 WR's, I'd be pleased as punch.

Or so I'm told.

by MN Bronco on Mar 24, 2008 9:15 AM MDT to parent up   0 recs

Great job!
It varies a little from some of my thinking, but I don't want "yes men" working with me, and you put my thoughts into what is available in the draft and came out with an excellent group.  Well thought out as always my man!  I like it.

I only have one tiny quibble.  I like getting Ainge to replace Hackney (and maybe even Ramsey down the road), but how do we trade away the 140th pick to the 49ers and still get to use it?  Your reasoning convinces me that the idea is sound, but we don't end up with the 140th, or do we?

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by hoosierteacher on Mar 24, 2008 10:14 AM MDT to parent up   0 recs

Nice stuff
About as good a mock draft as I have seen.

I would probably go with J Goff instead of Butler at MLB since we have to give K2 a chance... Picking Lofton so early would go against the signing of K2. But I do love Lofton.

I would use #29 to get Phillips if he were available.

I am not sure if all the guys you have listed are realistic choices for those picks, but it isn't a big deal.

Orange County is hot. Really! Haven't you seen the weather report?

by amirebram on Mar 24, 2008 2:54 PM MDT to parent up   0 recs

Good to see you again amir!
I think Phillips is about a #29 value, but since he is still the top safety in the draft he will go long before that.  There is a team out there somewhere that will REACH for him. ;)
OOMPA LOOMPA DOOMPADEE DOO
OOMPA LOOMPA, DOOMPADAH DEE
It's JaMakus Fail, RRRRRUUUUNNNN!!!!!

by Zappa on Mar 24, 2008 3:04 PM MDT to parent up   0 recs

Thanks
Persian new year, vacation and family reunion rolled up into one ... you can imagine why I don't have much time.

What if we were to give up #12 for a late 1st this year and another first next year? Let's say a #25 this year, and the 1st round pick next year? It could even be made fancy by saying that if the 1st was a top 10 pick then we get the 2nd round or something like that. I think it is worth it.

Do you think that's a good idea, or does everyone want to get more picks this year.

Orange County is hot. Really! Haven't you seen the weather report?

by amirebram on Mar 25, 2008 9:21 AM MDT to parent up   0 recs

Persia
Before I was married I dated a woman who was very proud of her Persian heritage.  She cook cook up some fantastic food from the middle east, and had a lot of facinating books about Persian history and poetry.  

She was a ballet instructor/dancer, so I also scored some pretty cool tickets to some nice fine arts events she was associated with.

She and her family left Iran about the time of the American Embassy crisis, and she had some interesting stories about problems they encountered trying to leave the country.

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by hoosierteacher on Mar 25, 2008 6:17 PM MDT to parent up   0 recs

And...
...I really like the idea of trading for future picks as you suggest.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by hoosierteacher on Mar 25, 2008 6:18 PM MDT to parent up   0 recs

re. your trade-down scenario w/49ers
     I goofed up the numbers you gave.  You had sent #140 to SF, so scratch Owen Scmitt from my mock and instead of Mike Dragosovich in the first 7th, put Jerome Felton FB Furman.  Carl Stewart, Auburn or Jed Collins, Wash.St. might be there as well.  Still think Broncos need a FB.

by dardarsh on Mar 24, 2008 3:19 PM MDT to parent up   0 recs

Excellent article, HT
As usual, I find myself agreeing with pretty much everything you said. As for DT, it's clear to me now why our LB's looked a little slower than usual last season, costing Gold his job. It was obviously difficult for them to stay focused with our DT's in their 3-pt stances. Maybe if they switched to CB they could really do a number on opposing WR's in their backpedals. But I digest... Question about Griffith. He was one of my favorite players during the SB years and I hated to see him go. I remember when we picked him up, I thought it was huge. In Carolina, he had cleared the way for Anthony Johnson's (yeah, a Domer) only 1000+ yd season. Having watched and been a big fan of AJ in college, I knew he didn't transition well to the pros and that a big reason he had that year was because of Griffith. History has borne that out. Anyway, why don't you consider him a true FB? Is it just because he was a tailback in college? To me, when he was with the Broncos, he was the best in the biz, peerless, and didn't get the credit he deserved. Now, as far as the draft goes, let me start by reiterating that I think you nailed your evaluations, position by position. I'll only add as an aside that I have mixed feelings about Hamilton coming back. I was at the U of MN when he was here and he was and is a top shelf guy. Reading the articles about how his concussions affected him and his young family were heartwrenching. I would've been happy to see him ride off into the sunset. Now, I also recognize how much he brings to the team. You see where I'm coming from? I'm really hoping for the best for him, and honestly, more from a personal standpoint than the team. So, back to the draft. I was all over Phillips at #12, too. I would be satisfied with Clady now. What I see happening though is they will trade down out of the #12 spot but also package some lower round picks to move up in the mid rounds. I know this may sound crazy or just impossible to pull off and it probably is (MattR, styg and amir would know more about this possibility than me), but I would see them maneuvering around to end up with 6 picks overall: 1,2,2,3,3,4 or 5. I just get the impression the past few years that they view late round picks as useful only for trading, getting just as good value from UndraftedFA's after the draft. I noticed you didn't address ST's. Normally, this wouldn't be a big deal, but this year they're in a state of flux to say the least. Shanny's on record saying they need a returner, but addressing the WR position will probably take that into account as well. But now with Elam gone (I'm reading his book, <u>Monday Night Jihad</u> rightnow, by the way. Very good. Vince Flynn-ish.), I wonder if they'll draft a kicker. I have my doubts, but if there's a guy available in a good value spot, they could pull the trigger. Similar situation with punter, though Paulescu may be the solution. Obviously, he has only 1 game experience, but he looked better in that one game than Saurbrun looked all season. Personally, I like that he's an old-school, go for the coffin corner kind of punter. To me, that's a lost art. Who knows if that flies with O'Brien, though? Anyway, that's my 2 cents. Thanks for the article and taking the time to write it.
Or so I'm told.

by MN Bronco on Mar 24, 2008 9:06 AM MDT   0 recs

Ah, !#@&%$@$
Sorry about the format on that post. I tried some HTML (underline) and accidentally hit Post instead of Preview.
Or so I'm told.

by MN Bronco on Mar 24, 2008 9:08 AM MDT to parent up   0 recs

Lots of good stuff in there MN
Denver took Griffith as a converted HB out of college (as you point out) and he fell into the FB role.  He was, as you point out, an awesome FB.  But I don't think Denver planned it that way, and that's why I said he wasn't a true FB.  I was looking at the cntext that Denver considered him when they took him.

Clearly he was a better FB than a HB.  I agree that Griffith was one of the best, and never got the credit he deserved except amongst hard core fans like us.

I agree on Hamilton.  Like Lynch, I respect him and would rather he retire than take a chance because some things (health and family) mean even more than winning ball games.

I also like the idea of trading up our lower picks, but have mixed feelings.  There are good arguments both ways.

Terrific thoughts as always MN.  You rock!

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by hoosierteacher on Mar 24, 2008 10:23 AM MDT to parent up   0 recs

Fullback thoughts
Peyton Hillis of Arkansas will probably be the first FB taken.  I hear he is a good blocker and pretty decent catching balls out of the backfield.  He would probably fit in well with Denver, but may be gone before Denver would want to invest a pick at FB.

What about a guy like Jacob Hester from LSU or Owen Schmitt from West Virginia in round 5?  I guess it would depend on the fundamentals of their blocking, but they are guys who can catch the ball and could be a good short yardage runner.

by MattR on Mar 24, 2008 10:53 AM MDT to parent up   0 recs

Griffith
Actually, Griffith was a free agent pick-up who had played FB for the Carolina Panthers. It was with the Panthers that he cleared the way for Johnson's 1K season. So, when Denver picked him up, he was already a FB. I understand he was an HB in college (Illinois), but I'm pretty sure he played only FB in the pros. This is all off the top of my head, so I'll have to dig a little to confirm this, but I feel pretty confident about it.
Or so I'm told.

by MN Bronco on Mar 24, 2008 2:33 PM MDT to parent up   0 recs

If you watch the
America's game DVD for the 97 superbowl (the full length version, not the one they show on NFL network all the time) they have a segment at the beginning where they are laying the dramatic groundwork for Griffith's hit on Levon Kirkland (the big mofo) in the playoffs later that year.

In the segment they are looking at some of the players Denver acquired, including Griffith.  It shows Griffith going to Shanny's office and Shanny reviewing some tape with him and talking about the FB position.

It also had a small segment from training camp where Shanny is watching Griffith run and catch passes, and he comments to one of his coordinators, something along the lines of "Oh yeah.  Classic fullback look.  He really looks like a FB doesn't he?"

That being said, I think HT has nailed Denver's current RB philosophy.  If the fullbacks job is primarily to block and be an outlet receiver, why use someone with rushing skills?  In 2006 we consistently lined up with a TE going in motion and moving to the FB spot, or with a TE in the FB spot, going in motion.  We started 2007 with some plays like that, but injuries took away our depth, and without Scheffler at the start of the year, I think the plan was to just use TEs in the strongside blocker rotation, and Sapp and whoever at FB.

Injuries really took a toll on the Bronco's offense last year.  I remember only one game where we started our 6 main offensive weapons, Walker, Marshall, Scheffler, Graham, Young, Stokely.  And in that game Walker shouldn't have even been out there yet.  Take that game out and we never had our offense on the field all at the same time last year.

I wish my sig was as cool as mdierks!

by styg50 on Mar 24, 2008 3:08 PM MDT to parent up   0 recs

Just a terminology peeve
     On Offense there must be seven on LOS.  Only the ends are eligible;  usually one tight and one split and they must be set.  The TE is Y and the split end is X.  Besides the QB (sometimes called 10) and the back(s) there is a 4th back called 40, Z or H-back.  This latter one is usually a TE deployed for blocking purposes.  A slot receiver is usually called Z.  Running backs are 20 (FB), 30 (TB) and 40 (Z, H-back) or in one-back formations, he's just R (e.g., razor).  So, when Graham is in motion or lined up in front of the TB, he isn't a TE, he's probably an H-back.  When Stokely is in motion or off LOS in the slot, he's Z or 40 back.  I think that's why they started calling all those pass catchers wide receivers whether they're on LOS or not.  However, A TE can't go in motion unless he tumbles before everyone is set or it's a penalty.  When you uncover a T, he becomes an end/a TE.  If there aren't seven on the LOS, it's a penalty and the officials can usually count to seven when they feel like it.          

by dardarsh on Mar 24, 2008 4:04 PM MDT to parent up   0 recs

No problem
To clarify:  One of our players who plays TE would line up in the role of a FB. ;)
I wish my sig was as cool as mdierks!

by styg50 on Mar 24, 2008 5:07 PM MDT to parent up   0 recs

Very nice work on terminology!
...and much deeper than I ever try to get with the University articles.  If you have the time, I'm sure the readers would benefit from a good diary detailing some of the terminology used on the offense.  (I recently caved in and did a gap/techniques story after swearing during the season that I wouldn't put the readers through it.  After getting a few questions from readers asking about the terms they heard being thrown around in the media, I relented).

In simple terms (for the sake of most of our readers), Styg's point about the "TE motion" is accurate (even if the terminology isn't technicaly correct, just as a layman calls abdominal pain "stomach" pain).

He's refering to a common practice in Denver a couple of years ago where an eligible TE in a twin TE set would motion back into the position normaly associated with the "FB position".  This was (is) a legal motion since one of the off scrimmage players simultaneously steps forward to scrimmage.  The forward moving player is not considered a second player in motion as long as his move coincides with a motion player leaving scrimmage to go into motion, and as long as the move is simultaneous.  But in Denver's case, I believe the motioning end began the formation off scrimmage, thus not neccessitating the forward movement of a second player.  I know that you know all of this, but it's a good learning opportunity for the readers.  I wouldn't fault Styg for his choice of wording, since I know he is considering his audience.

There's an awful lot of professional terminology that could be corrected in most conversations regarding the game (the recent zone block "debate" being an example).  For me, the standard is conversing with and teaching a wide audience.  With new members constantly coming on board, and with most members being casual fans, I try to aim more for technical appreciation and awareness rather than fully comprehensive and definitive knowledge.  Kind of like teaching EMT students to an EMT standard without getting into accurate (but physician level) elements of biology, chemistry and physiology.  I typicaly let most terms go by if the higher value of learning is achieved without scaring anyone off.

With the knowledge you have you could put out some terrific diaries for the readers wanting a little bit more than they get with the University series (kind of like a "post-graduate" series!).

Keep up the great comments!

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by hoosierteacher on Mar 24, 2008 6:53 PM MDT to parent up   0 recs

You are correct...
...and I was mistaken.  Carolina was responsible for the conversion.  

What I should have said is that he wasn't a true FB in the sense that he was converted from being a RB in college (whomever converted him).  Still, given the comment made by Shanahan according to Styg below (awesome find btw) it sounds like Mike was impressed by Griffith as a "classic" FB in the sense that he (Mike) considers the position dated for the most part.

I would prefer Denver pursue a true FB.  By this I mean that Denver always fills the position by giving it to the best blocker/receiver in the lower depths of our RB chart instead of pursuing a player born and bred to play the position.  They should do this until they finally go over the hump and convert to a more futuristic (or ancient, depending on your view) total TE system.  But I just don't think Mike likes to do it this way.

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by hoosierteacher on Mar 24, 2008 7:15 PM MDT to parent up   0 recs

Not to pick nits...
It was actually the Rams who put him at FB. He was drafted by the Colts, but never played for them. Then when he caught on with the Rams, it was as FB. Regardless, I was thinking he was in the classic FB mold mostly because of his build, 6'0" 230 lbs. and his strengths, knocking dudes out. So, I guess the question was more along the lines of: is there something else that would define him as a classic FB that I'm missing?
Or so I'm told.

by MN Bronco on Mar 25, 2008 9:55 AM MDT to parent up   0 recs

(Slapping my head)
Ok.  I know the guy didn't play FB until he hit the NFL, and was at some point converted.  After relying too much on bits and pieces of my pathetic memory I did what I should have done in the first place and actually looked up his history (before digging a deeper hole).  : )

There's no nitpicking involved if I'm just plain wrong.  Thanks for the correction!

He (Griffith) went from Southern IL Univ to being drafted by the Colts.  He didn't play for them, and spent two years with the Rams and then two with the Panthers.  He played five seasons with us as a FB.

He seldom ran, but he was a standout blocker and (as Denver is prone to have FBs do) went out for quite a few receptions out of the backfield (including setting up th final TD of the SB against GB with a 23 yard catch).  He also scored two rushing TDs in the SB against ATL.

One thing I learned (that I don't recall) is that he was nicknamed "The Human Plow" because of his run blocking magic powers.  : )

He retired due to a neck injury.

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by hoosierteacher on Mar 25, 2008 6:31 PM MDT to parent up   0 recs

Speaking of the "coffin corner"
     Good point about the return to punters going for the deep sideline.  Even if the ball doesn't go out, the punter has helped the coverage.  Sideline has never failed to make a stop.  Do you remember Bucky Dilts?  I always wondered if kicking punting left-footed gave him an advantage?

by dardarsh on Mar 24, 2008 3:33 PM MDT to parent up   0 recs

Dilts
Wow, he's a little before my time, I think.

It really baffles me that the corner kick has gone out of vogue. It's one of the things I used to hate Ray Guy for the most, besides just being a fader. He was constantly taking Upchurch out of the plan by kicking it out of bounds inside the 20. Nowadays, there's too much emphasis on the supposed "backspin" and bouncing the ball in the middle of the field. It doesn't make much sense to me, the other way seems way more deadly.

Or so I'm told.

by MN Bronco on Mar 24, 2008 4:11 PM MDT to parent up   0 recs

I voted to trade up.
nab a stud DT and then I disagree with your RB statement and draft one of those. You never know when you'll find the next TD in later rounds. :P

I also disagree with your FB grade, let's bring back Griffith.  

And I would like to see Early Bennet or Dexter Jackson on this team.

Everything else, solid.  And I vote to have ME be the guy to administer spankings.

;)

OOMPA LOOMPA DOOMPADEE DOO
OOMPA LOOMPA, DOOMPADAH DEE
It's JaMakus Fail, RRRRRUUUUNNNN!!!!!

by Zappa on Mar 24, 2008 9:25 AM MDT   0 recs

It is Early over here, but I meant to
say EARL.  :)
OOMPA LOOMPA DOOMPADEE DOO
OOMPA LOOMPA, DOOMPADAH DEE
It's JaMakus Fail, RRRRRUUUUNNNN!!!!!

by Zappa on Mar 24, 2008 9:25 AM MDT to parent up   0 recs

HEY!
No speeling error corrections!

:^P

Or so I'm told.

by MN Bronco on Mar 24, 2008 9:30 AM MDT to parent up   0 recs

I agree with you on Griffith...
...but the real Broncos will never go that route.

Good thoughts as always Zap!

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by hoosierteacher on Mar 24, 2008 10:09 AM MDT to parent up   0 recs

Good Assessment - a few thoughts
Denver needs starters at a few positions at depth at a few positions.  I bring up starter versus depth because you draft starters in the first 3 rounds (unless its a kicker) and depth later.  I'll break it down by urgency of need.

STARTERS:
We need 3 starters (maybe 4 in my opinion):

MUST HAVE:
+DT - 1 starter: Given the depth at DT in the draft this year, Denver would be crazy not to take a DT early and a 'project' later in the draft.[Kentwan Balmer,Pat Sims,Dre Moore]

DEPENDING ON THE TALENT AVAILABLE:
+OT - 1 starter: If Denver thinks a first or second rounder can come in and start over Pears or Harris, then, by ALL means, take one. We're talking about our bread and butter (the running game) and protecting our biggest investment (Jay Cutler). Harris has had back problems and Pears (although highly regarded by some of us locals) isn't a noteworthy player nationally.  I'd rather choose between Harris or Pears and a top tier talent rather than not have the ability to choose. [Ryan Clady, Chris Williams, Jeff Otah]

DEPENDING ON WHAT NEEDS YOU'VE ALREADY ADDRESSED AND WHAT TALENT IS AVAILABLE:
+WR - 1 starter: Again, if we think a 2nd or 3rd rounder can come in and compete for a starting spot over Colbert, then absolutely bring one in. Colbert is not a defense-stretching player, at least not in the NFL, unless Carolina was making him wear very heavy pads.  In my opinion, Denver needs some speed to pair with Brandon Marshall.  Marshall isn't the best at getting a clean release (he's getting better) and if we had the threat of speed on the other side, he'd get more favorable matchups more often.  Also, Marshall will draw more attention this year and with speed, you can't roll the safety his way very often if you're worried that your CB may get beat deep. [Eddie Royal, Andre Caldwell, Lavelle Hawkins, Earl Bennett]

+K - Face it, Matt Prater's not the answer.  The Broncos were smart not to spend money chasing Elam around when he's 50/50 from beyond 35 yards. [Alexis Serna, Arthur Carmody, Jeremy Ito]

DEPTH:
We need depth at RB, LB, and Safety some of these positions are a must for this year, some are for next year, but that's what the draft is for.

DEPTH FOR THIS YEAR:
+LB - 1 to 2 players: I really like what Denver's done in FA so far this year, but let's be honest: Boss has been injury plagued throughout his career and Niko has never started in the NFL. If you don't think Denver's gambling on the LB position in 2008, you're wrong.  Denver needs to look at a middle and outside linebacker in the draft.  This won't be addressed until 4th round or later, but LB depth looks great on special teams and can help Denver avoid the situation they were in all year last season.

DRAFT THIS YEAR FOR NEXT YEAR:
+S - 1 player: Lynch and Mcree aren't spring chickens.  I like  the addition of Mcree, but Denver is missing an athlete and leader at safety.  What happens if Lynch goes down?  Will Mcree step up?  Do we have any depth at 'Box Safety'?  Denver's had success when they've had great leadership and ability at safety, and to continue that trend, Denver's going to need to look to the draft.  This year's draft isn't big on talent at safety, so this pick depends on what Denver's already drafted and what's still available.

+RB - 1 player: Let's talk long term. Denver's 'franchise' RB (if there is still such a thing) is not on the roster.  I agree that T-Henry is a bruiser, but he really can't stay healthy.  He is effective, but not every week.  He has great games and bad games.  Selvin Young is a great back, but not likely a full time starter unless Denver goes into the Brian Westbrook offense, which they won't.  He had a top 5 yards per carry and top 11 yards after catch rankings last year, in just his rookie season.  That's an index putting Young in with the top 6 or 7 backs in the NFL (Westbrook, LT, Jones-Drew). Andre Hall's great depth here as well, but he's more of a change of pace back as well.  Unfortunately we don't have a back that can catch the ball, stay healthy, run big in the redzone, and has enough speed/elusiveness to make people miss.  I'm not sure Denver will find him this year, but mark my words, they'll be looking for one next year or the year after.

by super7 on Mar 24, 2008 10:26 AM MDT   0 recs

Good stuff super!
Some differences of opinion, but all of it backed up by good reasoning.

With two additions in FA at SAF, two current SAFs, and the hybrid Foxworth on the roster I feel ok with the depth (though I still wish we would count on our front seven to do their job and allow us to have a SS that plays back).

I feel a little better about RB than you do, but I wouldn't be surprised if Denver followed your advice and picked up both a SAF and RB this year.

Much agreed with the need for a speed WR to stretch the field.

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by hoosierteacher on Mar 24, 2008 7:24 PM MDT to parent up   0 recs

'08 Bronco draft/trading down
hoosierteacher:  Good analysis, although I don't agree w/all of it.  Agree that it isn't necessary to draft safeties, corners, OLB or DE, and that a MLB and a couple of DTs are needed.  My sense of urgency concerning the OL is much greater than yours.  Nalen is returning from injury and may retire soon.  Hamilton is returning from a more serious injury.  Wiegmann is getting old, too, and may not play much longer.  I see all of these guys as centers.  The big DTs in the league are pushing them around in pass pro, although they are still great on the move-zoning the stretch/cutback.  That leaves Pears, Holland and Kuper w/experience;  a grand total of six, half of whom have age & health concerns.  Harris is promising, but don't forget he had surgery during '07.  There are so many good OL in this draft it is hard not to acquire them now in order to keep Cutler alive.  Can't say I agree w/you about FB.  Your comments about Denver's system are persuasive, but not compelling.  There will be quite a few good FBs in the draft starting at about the 4th or 5th round.  They also make great ST players on punt & KO.  Can you imagine a formation w/Mustard at tight-Y sealing inside w/Graham in the slot (Z, H-back) going in motion to the strong side with a big FB leading the way at the same time the OL is cutting  the front seven?  Boot out of that after the run is working and hit Marshall on the back side.  Doesn't that sound like Bronco-ball to you?  I do agree w/the need for WR;  more every day-a WR with speed.  Someone to complement Marshall's talents (you know, a roommate to pick up the trash and move the TV out of the way and be designated driver, too).  I agree that there is