Roster Judgement: Concerns.

by ejruiz on Aug 28, 2008 12:09 AM MDT

I realize that this point in the season is one in which most fans are either overly optimistic or far too pessamistic and I wouldn't pressume to be above that. Instead, I just wanted to present some of my feelings for you guys to help me. I know most of you have properties in La-La Land, so I'll take the opposite approach because I'm comfortable as a devil's advocate. So, without further ado, here are my concerns in a position by position format:

QB: Cutler is a superstar in the making, but we have basically no depth behind him.
RB: There's definitely depth here, but there isn't a true franchise back in the bunch,
FB: I love Peyton Hillis, but I wonder if incorporating a FB into our offense isn't a step backwards in our system's progression.
WR: Royal's rapid ascent on our depth chart speaks to his skills, but it also exposes his competition as wanting.
TE: Scheffler's never healthy and Graham's still basically a 6th lineman at this point.
OL: Not much experience up front and major injury questions marks for those veterans there is worrisome.
DE: The youngsters don't seem to be stepping up and Doom seems to be on his own again.
DT: Not loving the depth here and the overall talent is not much better. Robertson's health and Thomas' developement are both musts and suspect.
LB: Webster failed on the outside last year and now he's at the heart of our D. Boss' back-up will likely see some time and can't be very good.
CB: Can we trust Bly opposite of Champ? How will those burried in the depth chart by those two vets respond to limited playing time and stiff competition?
S: McCree might be the new Lynch and I don't think we've found the answer opposite him.
ST: I'm liking the depth for the coverage teams, but young kickers and punters usually struggle unless they're studs.

Well, I feel that's about as negative as I can be at this time. Honestly (and I've said this often) I think this squad should be good enough for a winning record and will challenge for a Wild Card. Overall, I'm worried by our defense (especially up the middle) and I fear that we may be in for another frustrating year insomuch as a couple more playmakers on that side of the ball would make us legit contenders. So, tell me where I'm wrong; I'd be happy to hear it! Cheers!

This is a Fan-Created Comment on MileHighReport.com. The opinion here is not necessarily shared by the editorial staff of MHR

2 recs | Comment 63 comments

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Okay

I know you are being realistic with your fear and I respect that! Heres My thoughts
QB- Hackney will be good to toss the ball to a RB thats all we should need. If we need more just like anyother NFL we struggle
HB- We have a possible Fran. Back in Torain. The depth will suffice for now
FB- Hillis is a beast. Our O isnt stepping back by putting this boy on the field.
WR- Does his ascension speak to his ability? I think we have a god group of guys and we are sorting the men from the boys.
TE- No worries Graham can catch but IS better at blocking. Sceffler is the real deal its hard to come back from toe/foot injury (A Gates)
OL- Looks good. You have to get younger before you can get better
DL- Together this isnt a bad group. Robertsons Injury has NOT kept him out of regular season play. Thomas will step up as will crowder. I expect big things from this line. 2.9 ypc against Gren bay’s #1’s who were TRYING to win the game
OLB- Not worried DJ will rock as always, Boss will end up being ok but another target spot for the draft or moving one of our speed demon MLB rookies over to SLB next year.
MLB- Niko will be in the middle soon and another target for next years draft
CB- TRADE BLY sorry had to say it Foxy will replace bly mid season! or when we trade him!
SAF- We have two good guys here who can play and then you have barrett. Another target area for next years draft. the jokers behind barret imo can all go!

Not to rip you a new one just to express my view I see us targeting our defense much like we targeted our offense this year. MLB SAF and DL will get serious looks this next draft. Good post worth the read!

" He goes against Champ everyday." -Jay Cutler

Davis to the Hall!

by Jon Tollerud on Aug 28, 2008 12:25 AM MDT 0 recs

Thanks!

No worries about chiming in, since this is exactly what I’m looking for. I;m worried about our defense as well and think we will end up focusing on that side of the ball in the offseason. That said, the offense should rock, so perhaps that adds to the focus on defensive concerns.

Here we go again: http://thefulldeck.blogspot.com/

by ejruiz on Aug 28, 2008 1:27 AM MDT up 0 recs

Then you won't mind this comment.

I’m still in the la-la-land-of-pre-season-feel-goods. I have no concerns.

In fact if Brandon get his sentenced reduced to one or zero days I could change ‘feel-goods’ to ‘feel-greats’ !!!

Broncos broncos everywhere and all the league did blink,
Broncos broncos everywhere think moldy faiders stink!

by Mike Clark on Aug 28, 2008 4:10 PM MDT up 0 recs

I agree with every single one of your concerns. I also agree that everything must go right for this team to go far this year....

We are still much improved over last year…and last year we were 7-9. We lost some close heart breakers that could have put us into the playoffs or we could have not won some close heart stoppers and finished near the bottom. I think this team gets into the playoffs…

If God is not a Bronco fan, then WHY are sunsets Blue and Orange? - Jon Tollerud 5/22/08

I got a high ankle sprain in college and it still hurts! ~ TSG 8/13/08

by Zappa on Aug 28, 2008 9:08 AM MDT 0 recs

I'm sure you meant, 'will go right.'

Broncos broncos everywhere and all the league did blink,
Broncos broncos everywhere think moldy faiders stink!

by Mike Clark on Aug 28, 2008 4:11 PM MDT up 0 recs

Here's what I love

QB: Cutler looks like the franchise QB we have been waiting for since you know who left town, now we get 12 to 15 years to enjoy the ride, I am not worried about a back-up situation, Jay is big, strong and durable, and now that he has the diabeties issue taken care of he should be fine.

RB: Torain will return and be the feature back, but I like our depth and Young and Hall can move the chains, which is what is needed.

WR: Marshall has a chance to be the best WR in the league for the next decade, Royal looks like a great No. 2, and we have the best slot WR in the league, yes depth is lacking, but few teams have more than two great WR or even one, so be happy.

OL: Our line is youthful but appears to finally have an infusion of pro-bowl talent, nothing against Lepis, and Pears but when those are your starting OT, you have problems. I will be sad to see Nalen go, but I think Hamilton will eventually slide to C and Holland will come back as that mean nasty OG, and we will be set for the next 5 years until Hamilton decides to retire.

DL: Again we have youth and I am not sold on Crowder and Moss, but I think we have continued to upgrade and now hopefully we have a system that fits the personel.

LB: I agree, other than DJ, this group is below average, but I think they can do fine.

CB: Love this group, I know all the Bly haters out there, but it’s hard for me to name a group of CB with more talent than Denver, and Bly will be fine. Yes he will give up a big play, but he also makes plays. Can’t have five Champ Bailey clones. Be happy with what we have.

S: I wasn’t in love with this group, but I am coming around, looks like coverage and range is no longer an issue, I still want to see that Atwater Lynch style safety back there and I don’t know if Barret can be that player, but overall this group is better than last years

P/K: Way excited about this, yes they are young, but it looks like we got some good talent and strong legs, coverage units still need work, but as long as Prater is booming them in the end zone, I am fine with having opposing teams starting at the 20 every time.

Broncoman

by Broncoman on Aug 28, 2008 11:16 AM MDT 0 recs

I'm going to call you donkeys on this everytime.

we have the best slot WR in the league

Unless you traded for Wes Welker, and you didn’t, then you don’t have the best slot reciever in the league.

by RaiderPete on Aug 28, 2008 12:46 PM MDT up 0 recs

Welker is a #2 now dude!

" He goes against Champ everyday." -Jay Cutler

Davis to the Hall!

by Jon Tollerud on Aug 28, 2008 12:52 PM MDT up 0 recs

It's not all cookie cutters and Madden rosters in the NFL

Look for Jabar Gaffney to spend a lot of time split out with Welker in the slot still.

by RaiderPete on Aug 28, 2008 12:56 PM MDT up 0 recs

I dont even know the Madden Line that well

but afte the production last year I would assume #2 if I mis guessed my bad!

" He goes against Champ everyday." -Jay Cutler

Davis to the Hall!

by Jon Tollerud on Aug 28, 2008 2:01 PM MDT up 0 recs

he is actually

a better return guy. Plus the reason he had so many receptions is he went 3-4 yards and went in or out. It was a glorified run.

by broncfanstuckinsd on Aug 28, 2008 12:57 PM MDT up 0 recs

i think he's even average as a returner

if you look at his stats

"I wouldn't ever set out to hurt anyone deliberately unless it was, you know, important --like a league game or something." DICK BUTKUS

by TedBartlett905 on Aug 28, 2008 1:00 PM MDT up 0 recs

Welker is tremendously overrated..

because he plays for New England, but even more than that, he’s overrated because he is little and white, and idiot sportswriters all secretly think that could have been them if they got a break (except for Bill “Porkchop” Williamson… he has no such illusions.) This is a guy who consistently averages 10 yards per catch, which is below average for any receiver. I don’t think he is better than Stokley, I just think he’s in an offense that showcases him a lot more. Remember, in Miami, he was a totally league-average player, and he’s still the same guy.

"I wouldn't ever set out to hurt anyone deliberately unless it was, you know, important --like a league game or something." DICK BUTKUS

by TedBartlett905 on Aug 28, 2008 12:56 PM MDT up 0 recs

1112 catches for 1175 yards and 8 touchdowns and a 21.3% DVOA

Hmmmm…. that doesn’t sound over rated to me. And spare me the race card.

by RaiderPete on Aug 28, 2008 1:01 PM MDT up 0 recs

112 catchs

by RaiderPete on Aug 28, 2008 1:01 PM MDT up 0 recs

Sounds like 10.4 yards per catch to me...

which is below-average, no matter what you say. And it’s not playing the race card to suggest that white sportswriters tend to favor white players, it’s just true.

"I wouldn't ever set out to hurt anyone deliberately unless it was, you know, important --like a league game or something." DICK BUTKUS

by TedBartlett905 on Aug 28, 2008 1:04 PM MDT up 0 recs

8.1 yards per attempt and a 77% catch rate

compared to Marshalls 7.8 yards per attempt and only a 60% catch rate.

In case thats difficult for you to understand, it means that Welker, on average, got more yards out of passes thrown to him than Marshal did. It means that Welker caught the ball nearly 20% more often than Marshall did.

Welker is very good. He’s also a slot reciever, so his value is relative, but there is no doubt that he’s the best slot reciever in the league right now.

by RaiderPete on Aug 28, 2008 1:12 PM MDT up 0 recs

I'm a professional financial analyst

so numbers aren’t a problem for me. That said, I think the receiving stats at profootballoutsiders are ill-conceived and largely worthless, because they do not isolate the play of the WR from that of the QB. Marshall’s stats on there are a good example, because they’re artificially depressed by the large number of times the ball was thrown in his direction last season, which didn’t result in a completion.

I tend to think SABRMetric measures in baseball have some merit, but I think footballoutsiders is mostly bunk, because it has unobjective bias in the way the formulae measure the results. It is utter nonsense to suggest that 112 catches for 1175 yards is better than 102 catches for 1325 yards, no matter what the circumstances.

And logically, there is doubt about Welker being the best slot guy, because I doubt it. And, I am not the only person who does.

"I wouldn't ever set out to hurt anyone deliberately unless it was, you know, important --like a league game or something." DICK BUTKUS

by TedBartlett905 on Aug 28, 2008 1:33 PM MDT up 0 recs

It's not though.

There are things that the numbers don’t take into consideration, but as long as you know that going in the numbers are still valuable. Just because the numbers aren’t pin point accurate all on their own doesn’t mean they don’t have immense value.

Brandan Marshall is a better reciever than Wes Welker, it was dumb of me to compare the two. Outside of QB play, where Brady is clearly better than Cutler, you also have to take into consideration how often Welker gets lined up against a safety, linebacker, and nickle corner. Marshall is getting a corner every time, usually the other teams best corner.

But that doesn’t mean that Welker isn’t good, or that those numbers are worthless. Going through catch rate most of the number 1 type recievers are right around 60% (Moss has a 61% rate, T.O. had a 57% rate) with the exception of a couple freaks like Reggie Wayne. When you look at the catch rates that get up around 70% it’s mostly those slot guys. But Welkers 77% catch rate is 5% higher than the second highest catch rate, and thats ridiculous.

DVOA and success points are hardly useless either. It’s based on what other players get in similar situations, and it’s adjusted for the strength of defense you faced. Again, Welker’s DVOA is going to be slightly inflated since he plays out of the slot, but it’s still far and away better than his peers. So while these numbers aren’t perfect, they show Welker as consistently better than other slot recievers. And lets not knock him for being part of a great offense, he contributed a lot to the success of that team.

As far as Marshall being punished for being targetted so frequently, it’s a case where you have to use your brain in addition to the numbers. Even so, he’s rated as the 27th best reciever in the league, which although it’s not pin point accurate, it’s not too shabby for Marshall. And I think that he was dropped because of a combination of being targeted a lot (although not too much more than Chad Johnson or Larry Fitzgerald) and a slightly lower TD count.

by RaiderPete on Aug 28, 2008 1:59 PM MDT up 0 recs

Let me back Ted up

With Denver being a run first run second run third and then pass when the run is done team, having a receiver who can put up numbers liek that are spectacular. Also take into account the QB yards. anyway on RAW average Marshall 12.99 YPC Welker 10.49ypc! Point Marshall

" He goes against Champ everyday." -Jay Cutler

Davis to the Hall!

by Jon Tollerud on Aug 28, 2008 2:05 PM MDT up 0 recs

Well, 12.99 YPC isn't some spectacular number

And YPC is only part of the picture. And as far as the Bronco running strategy goes, Marshall was targeted A TON, only a couple recievers come close to having been thrown at as much as Marshall was.

To be clear though, I wasn’t ripping on Marshall, just using him as a comparison since you’re all familiar with him. The idea was to use Marshall, a very good reciever, to show the significance of Welkers numbers. It was ultimately a bad idea though for several reasons, not the least of which is how sensitive you guys get.

by RaiderPete on Aug 28, 2008 2:11 PM MDT up 0 recs

And back to Stokely...

My argument is that he is the best slot receiver in the League. By arguing that someone else is, you now seem to conceed that the title is between two people.

Let’s accept the premise their. Because it sound like, arguably, either Stokely or someone else is the best slot receiver in the League. That’s pretty damned high praise for Stokely (or any player).

What I’m saying is this. If Stokely is even “arguably” the best slot receiver in the game, then he’s good enough to be called that by a lot of folks.

To rip on Stokley (and really make your argument), you would need to compare Stokley NOT against whom you think is the best (because the implication is that ONE of them IS the best), but instead to try and connect or compare Stokley to an average slot receiver. I don’t think it can be done.

Also, consider this. Stokley spent a good portion of last year filling in for Walker at the #1 position (a couple of pay grades higher). He did so, and did so very, very well. Not bad for a slot guy.

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

by hoosierteacher on Aug 28, 2008 2:11 PM MDT up 0 recs

Between his fluctuating role

and his injury history it’s hard to compare Stokely against other slot guys. But there actually is a player out there similar to him, Bobby Engram.

Engram is a slot specialist who was forced into a starting role due to injuries last year. The comparison isn’t great because Engram was targeted nearly twice as often as Stokely, but it’s the best we have. Stokely has a really nice 25% DVOA compared to Engrams 13, but Engrams catch rate of 70 on twice as many opportunites blows Stokelys 57% rate out of the water. All in all, they were fairly equal last year.

Thats pretty high praise to compare Stokely’s year last season to Engrams 90 catch, 1100 yard year. Unfortunately for Stokely, Engram isn’t thought to be the best slot reciever in the league. And it’s just another testament to Welker that working out of the slot as the third or second option he had a better year than Engram did as the first option.

by RaiderPete on Aug 28, 2008 2:41 PM MDT up 0 recs

Too many variables there.

You’re comparing two slots who filled in at “higher” positions. I don’t think many stats profs would allow for that. While Stokley filled in well at a #1 spot (and that’s to his credit, and why I brought it up), there are many parameters associated with comparing “just” the abilities of 2 slot guys moved to a starting position. For example, Stokley posted solid numbers, and did it with a QB who was playing his first full year and losing an extraordinary amount of weight due to an untreated illness.

My point in comparisons is looking at a slot player in his role (over time, to satisfy stats rules of play) against other slot players playing their own role.

Again, I really don’t think one can categorically reject Stokley as one of the best (if not THE best) slot receivers in the game today. My point was that you (perhaps unintentionaly) promote Stokley to a great status by comparing him to someone (Welker) that you perhaps think is more deserving of the title.

For example, if I argue that Elway is the best QB in the Leaugue, and your retort is to compare him to Montana, you are conceeding they are in the same class, and EITHER player is arguably the top player. To really go after Elway, you would have to compare him to an average QB to make the point. Folks can argue between Elway and Montana (and Marino, and on and on and on), but the conclusion is that one of these guys probably IS considered the best.

FWIW, I think most people agree that Stokley is in the category to be “arguably” the best, even if some folks don’t think he IS the best. Frankly, I thought Stokley was the best slot before he came to Denver, and he continues to prove himself by accomplishing solid numbers without Manning throwing to him (and with a young QB who still doesn’t spread the ball terribly well).

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

by hoosierteacher on Aug 28, 2008 3:01 PM MDT up 0 recs

I don't completely disagree with you

but by that argument you’d never be able to declare someone is the best at anything. Michael Jordan doesn’t lose his status as best basketball player ever because Magic, Bird, and Wilt all enter in that discussion as well. And the example of Elway v Marino v Montana is flawed as well since each of them excelled at different facets (Montana with Rings, Marino with stats, and Elway with a combination of the two) which leaves the argument up to subjective reasoning.

I agree with you though in that Stokely is very good, and he is one of the best. I just think there is a difference between one of the best and the best, and I think when you’re comparing two slot recievers it is to a large degree measurable. Either way you’ve got yourself a mighty fine ball catcher in Stokely.

by RaiderPete on Aug 28, 2008 3:13 PM MDT up 0 recs

Not at all.

There is no objective best (and I think you conceed this:

…is flawed as well since each of them excelled at different facets

). While many folks would say Jordan is (the greatest ever), there remains several players in the discussion (and you named them). On the other hand, are you REALLY trying to say that Welker is so overwhelmingly the best, that there is no discussion of Stokley? And are you comparing Welker to a Jordan, or a Tiger Woods?

I’ve often heard a lot of folks (outside of Indy and Denver) refer to Stokley as the best all around TE in the League. That doesn’t make it true (and I wouldn’t say the dominance issue is as strong as, let’s say, a Jordan or a Woods).

Of course, if WELKER is the Jodan or the Woods of NFL TEs, then I would have to conceed that Welker is likely better than Stokley. But I don’t hear that. (in fact, there are quite a few TEs that are very good in the modern NFL, and I think that’s part of a major shift I’ve written about).

At any rate, I agree that we have quite a TE in Stokley. I also would say that Welker is pretty darned good too. So in the end, we’re all happy. : )

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

by hoosierteacher on Aug 28, 2008 4:05 PM MDT up 0 recs

you mean slot

not TE… yes?

Mountains, forest, sea: these render man fierce, but yet do not destroy the man.

by styg50 on Aug 28, 2008 4:51 PM MDT up 0 recs

Looooooooooooooooooong day.

Yes. Slot.

I knew what I was talking about a few comments ago. : )

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

by hoosierteacher on Aug 28, 2008 5:32 PM MDT up 0 recs

How about we all agree that Welker and Stokley are both

premier slot receivers. Because they are!

If God is not a Bronco fan, then WHY are sunsets Blue and Orange? - Jon Tollerud 5/22/08

I got a high ankle sprain in college and it still hurts! ~ TSG 8/13/08

by Zappa on Aug 28, 2008 5:21 PM MDT up 0 recs

Zappa the peacemaker!

Now I’ve seen it all.

: )

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

by hoosierteacher on Aug 28, 2008 5:32 PM MDT up 0 recs

Zappa playing the peacemaker

Lord have mercy we are all in trouble! I think you spent too much time in Sacramento dude!

" He goes against Champ everyday." -Jay Cutler

Davis to the Hall!

by Jon Tollerud on Aug 28, 2008 6:04 PM MDT up 0 recs

Peace makers in Sacramento?!?!?

lmao, have you been paying attention to the budget crisis?!? I hate this city…too many pompus arrogant self important a-holes in this town!!! Oh wait, I’m one of them!

If God is not a Bronco fan, then WHY are sunsets Blue and Orange? - Jon Tollerud 5/22/08

I got a high ankle sprain in college and it still hurts! ~ TSG 8/13/08

by Zappa on Aug 28, 2008 6:44 PM MDT up 0 recs

lol

…too many pompus arrogant self important a-holes in this town!!! (…I’m one of them)

Well, you’re only half right!

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

by hoosierteacher on Aug 28, 2008 7:55 PM MDT up 0 recs

i'm all right baby! its Friday, which means no traffic....

every Friday half of the state employees in California call in sick….it really makes for a nice drive to and from work.

If God is not a Bronco fan, then WHY are sunsets Blue and Orange? - Jon Tollerud 5/22/08

I got a high ankle sprain in college and it still hurts! ~ TSG 8/13/08

by Zappa on Aug 29, 2008 8:29 AM MDT up 0 recs

Raider Pete who's your slot?

Welker is a number #2 reciever and the fact is New England was running a glorified version of the run and shoot last year, so basically they had two slots and two out wide, Welker is very good and I agree he is a better WR than Stokely at this point in his career, but I will take Stokely as a #3 anytime.

Broncoman

by Broncoman on Aug 28, 2008 3:26 PM MDT up 0 recs

I have to agree with Pete here. Welker emerged as the most dominate slot receiver in the game last year...

We’ll find out this year whether he was a fluke or one year wonder or what…but no slot guy has ever produced the numbers he did last season.

If God is not a Bronco fan, then WHY are sunsets Blue and Orange? - Jon Tollerud 5/22/08

I got a high ankle sprain in college and it still hurts! ~ TSG 8/13/08

by Zappa on Aug 28, 2008 5:21 PM MDT up 0 recs

And we got your donkey right here,

the Raiders can come and get it on Sept. 8th

"I wouldn't ever set out to hurt anyone deliberately unless it was, you know, important --like a league game or something." DICK BUTKUS

by TedBartlett905 on Aug 28, 2008 12:57 PM MDT up 0 recs

Again, you comapre apples to oranges

Look at New England offense last year, it was the run and shoot, we run a zone running scheme with play action, most WR in a run and shoot or spread offense are bound to have ungodly numbers, especially if you are throwing the ball 50 + times a game. Stokely is the best slot, Welker is a great number 2 reciever in the league, although Royal may have something to say about that this year.

Broncoman

by Broncoman on Aug 28, 2008 3:29 PM MDT up 0 recs

However you want to cut it

Welker did nearly all of his work out of the slot, not split out wide, so he’s a slot reciever.

Also, Brady only threw 50+ times once last year, and only broke 40 passes a game 4 other times.

by RaiderPete on Aug 28, 2008 3:43 PM MDT up 0 recs

There's a debate in coaching circles about defining positions.

Frankly, you are both correct.

If a guy is the #2 receiver, but plays primarily in the slot, he can be defined either way (depending on who you ask). For example, if we line up our FB as a TE, he is still a FB on the depth chart. He played as a TE, so he can be refered to as a TE in the formation.

I myself define a player by his listed position. If he is a RB, but he motions into slot, I call him a “RB in the slot”. I do this, because as a coach I want to define him for his known traits (RB) to prepare my game plan, but I want to define his played position (slot) because I need to communicate to my players the proper adjustment based on what they see on the field.

Other coordinators I know would strictly call the RB a slot receiver, while others would call him a “HB in slot”. In my own defense, at least there is more information provided by those who define the position by the depth assignment.

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

by hoosierteacher on Aug 28, 2008 4:17 PM MDT up 0 recs

Minor quible

The Patriots run the Erhardt-Perkins system on offense. Some folks might not recognize it, because they assume the EP is a smash mouth system. In fact, it can be used in a wide variety of ways (like the spread, the single wing, or the option). NE uses an EP that is based much more on finesse, and looks nothing at all like the Steelers (who use a power version).

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

by hoosierteacher on Aug 28, 2008 4:10 PM MDT up 0 recs

I'm sure you meant, "call you Broncos," I call you guys Raiders (not faiders) when I visit your SB site.

Broncos broncos everywhere and all the league did blink,
Broncos broncos everywhere think moldy faiders stink!

by Mike Clark on Aug 28, 2008 4:15 PM MDT up 0 recs

Broncoman---------Great comment!

Broncos broncos everywhere and all the league did blink,
Broncos broncos everywhere think moldy faiders stink!

by Mike Clark on Aug 28, 2008 4:16 PM MDT up 0 recs

Come on now guys

Wes Welker is not overrated. The guy is a great football player. We would be absolutely thrilled to have him in Blue and Orange. If he was a Bronco and Stokley was a Patriot we would laugh at anyone saying Stokley was better. Come on now. Give credit where it is due. Plus, when he was in Miami, he was probably the best player on the whole team. On the offense anyway. I’d bet that Parcells would have kept him in a heartbeat if he was still there.

I don't believe we can win every game, just the next one. - Lou Holtz
Success is a lousy teacher. It seduces smart people into thinking they can't lose.-Bill Gates

by orangeblood on Aug 28, 2008 1:33 PM MDT 0 recs

I stand firm on this...

I think a lot of guys could get 10 yards a catch on 112 catches with Tom Brady throwing underneath against a defense which is threatened vertically by the likes of Randy Moss and Donte Stallworth. And I think Brandon Stokley is definitely a guy who could do it.

"I wouldn't ever set out to hurt anyone deliberately unless it was, you know, important --like a league game or something." DICK BUTKUS

by TedBartlett905 on Aug 28, 2008 1:36 PM MDT up 0 recs

And remember....

when the Patriots gave up 2nd and 7th round picks for Welker, and paid him long dollars, it was somewhat shocking. You say he was Miami’s best player, which means he had 67 catches for 687 yards and 1 touchdown. That sounds like the same 10 yards per catch to me.

I’m also the guy who says that Jerome Bettis is overrated, and not deserving of the induction into the Hall of Fame that he will certainly get. Not to sound too much like Sal Paolantonio, but some guys just get more hype than they deserve, and I think Welker is a huge example. Next week, I expect Peter King to name him one of the top 20 players in the League, which he is definitely not.

"I wouldn't ever set out to hurt anyone deliberately unless it was, you know, important --like a league game or something." DICK BUTKUS

by TedBartlett905 on Aug 28, 2008 1:42 PM MDT up 0 recs

Stokely did do it

Look at his 2004 season with the Colts when he was in the slot with Harrison and Wayne on the outside. 68 catches, 1077 yds and 10 TDs. That 15.8 YPC is better than both Moss and Stallworth in 2007 (15.2 YPC each)

by MattR on Aug 28, 2008 1:42 PM MDT up 0 recs

Its kinda funny

a fader fan trying to bag on Marshall has to use the Pats to do it, oh ya thats right the faders dont have any good WR’s or a QB

by broncfanstuckinsd on Aug 28, 2008 2:03 PM MDT up 0 recs

ouch, that has to sting.

Michael Fabiano really knows nothing about football outside of regression analysis and stat extrapolation. If it doesn’t have to do with fantasy football, his opinion is worthless.

by kwool79 on Aug 28, 2008 2:04 PM MDT up 0 recs

When did I bag on Marshall?

And what do the Raiders have to do with the discussion about slot recievers?

by RaiderPete on Aug 28, 2008 2:05 PM MDT up 0 recs

unless your 12:12pm comment wasnt against marshall

sure sounded like it to me

by broncfanstuckinsd on Aug 28, 2008 2:16 PM MDT up 0 recs

I think this was your admission earlier on.

Brandan Marshall is a better reciever than Wes Welker, it was dumb of me to compare the two.

No harm, no foul. But I think that’s what BFSiSD was talking about.

And BTW, I appreciate how you are making your points and being cool about it. We’ve had bad experiences in the past with other fans, and you’re keeping everything on an even keel. I hope our fans reciprocate the respect.

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

by hoosierteacher on Aug 28, 2008 2:17 PM MDT up 0 recs

Tuna probably would have kept Chambers as well

"It's all over Fat Man" - Tom Jackson to John Madden 1977 AFC Championship Game

"I wouldn't say he's nowhere near T.O." - Pacman Jones on Brandon Marshall

"I love your analysis of our team. Its kinda like watching a spider monkey trying to figure out a jar of peanuts.. you know whats going on.. you know whats in there, but to actually figure it out, is just a bit beyond your mental skills..."
- Bronco Dano from DP Comments

by DesertBroncoFan on Aug 28, 2008 1:54 PM MDT up 0 recs

true dat

I don't believe we can win every game, just the next one. - Lou Holtz
Success is a lousy teacher. It seduces smart people into thinking they can't lose.-Bill Gates

by orangeblood on Aug 29, 2008 7:37 AM MDT up 0 recs

RaiderPete

While I appreciate everyone’s input in this thread so far, I just wanted to thank you for providing a great counterexample to some of the Raiders fans that had made their way to our site previously. You make fair points and do a good job of backing them up, even brushing off some unnecessary (it’s off topic, guys) trash-talking along the way. Personally, I enjoy the viewpoint of rivals (DaBolts is one of my favorite frequent contributors) and I just wanted to thank you for yours. I hope you stick around and stay classy through the season!

By the way, I personally like Wes Welker and think he’s one of the best slot guys in the league. I may be biased (even though much of the evidence for my next statement comes from his time in Indy), but I think Stokely is right up there with him. As for Marshall, you ain’t seen nothing yet. That Brandon is on his way up (as is his QB and the rest of the offense) and the sky’s the limit for him.

Here we go again: http://thefulldeck.blogspot.com/

by ejruiz on Aug 28, 2008 2:41 PM MDT 0 recs

Those other Raider fans

do a good job of keeping me under the radar, and I like that. They’re also a passionate, if a little overly optimistic, bunch and I respect the hell out of them for that. Personally, I save my shouting and rage for the stadiums, in between games I just like to have good football discussions. And if I’m lucky I get to toss a few barbs at some donkeys along the way.

by RaiderPete on Aug 28, 2008 3:03 PM MDT up 0 recs

As long as its mostly good football discussion

I think we can handle a few barbs thrown our way :)

by MattR on Aug 28, 2008 3:15 PM MDT up 0 recs

wes welker...

…was the super bowl mvp until “the miracle” happened, and i think he and moss are the only receivers worth a damn on that team. denver has marshall and stokely. both teams have excellent tight end threats. is welker better than stokely? maybe right now, over their careers, no. i’ll take either one and look like a genius doing it, though. numbers really don’t mean a thing, people. wins do, so save it for the fantasy league

by davecheffy on Aug 28, 2008 3:38 PM MDT 0 recs