Horse Tracks 2/27/09

by Douglas A. Lee on Feb 27, 2009 5:10 AM MST in Horse Tracks

Horsetracks_new_medium

FOX - Running Backs JJ Arrington and Correll Buckhalter are expected to sign today in Denver.

DP - The Broncos allowed all of their UFAs to hit the market and have expressed interest in CB Ronald Bartrell of St. Louis and WR Michael Clayton of Tampa Bay.

RMN - As free agency begins, Jeff Legwold reminds us that Denver needs help on special teams in addition to the defense.

SI - Peter King tells us what he's hearing, among other things that Chris Canty is visiting with the Redskins, while Domonique Foxworth is likely going home to sign with Baltimore.

SI - SoCal City has approved $800 million in funding for a new football stadium. Now, all they need is a team...

Rocky, you will be missed...

RMN - Arrington and Buckhalter are represented by the same agent.

Y! - DeAngelo Hall got $22.5 million in guarantees from Washington, one year after getting $24 million from the Crypt Keeper. Wow. How about that?

Y! - Washington, Tampa Bay and the Giants have all reportedly made contact with Albert Haynesworth.

Y! - Indy got wise and re-signed Jeff Saturday. Meanwhile, Yeremiah Bell re-upped in Miami.

SI - LDT and the Chargers are still working on a restructuring Tomlinson's contract.

Jamie Winborn is visiting Buffalo.

SI - Jim Trotter lists AFC team needs, while Don Banks covers the NFC squads.

SI - Bucky Brooks lists his top-25 free agents.

ESPN Insider - Scouts Inc grades out all of the free agents.

SI - Tom Brady and Gisele reportedly tied the knot yesterday.

Tweet Comment 16 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Arrington and Buckhalter

I can understand the signing of J.J. Arrington. He can return kicks and be a third-down back, basically what we thought that Alridge would do. But, I don’t understand why we are going to sign Buckhalter.

by PABroncofan on Feb 27, 2009 5:39 AM MST reply actions

According to Wikipedia JJ Arington already plays for Denver.

by ThorpeBroncosfan on Feb 27, 2009 6:36 AM MST reply actions

Someone got ahead of themselves. Nothing’s official, as of yet.

by Douglas A. Lee on Feb 27, 2009 7:12 AM MST up reply actions

I don't know... Maybe Wikipedia secretly runs the NFL.

by ThorpeBroncosfan on Feb 27, 2009 7:16 AM MST up reply actions

I'm not impressed with the Buckhalter signing.

by ThorpeBroncosfan on Feb 27, 2009 6:39 AM MST reply actions

Well, keep in mind that we don't know what his role will be...

He is a versatile back who has been productive when he’s played. Take a peek at his numbers…

http://www.nfl.com/players/correllbuckhalter/profile?id=BUC578164

by Douglas A. Lee on Feb 27, 2009 7:14 AM MST up reply actions

Personally I would perer pittman, if he is healthy. Granted Buckhalter probably has more seasons left in him.

by ThorpeBroncosfan on Feb 27, 2009 7:18 AM MST reply actions

...prefer...

by ThorpeBroncosfan on Feb 27, 2009 7:18 AM MST reply actions

Stupid Moves!!!!!

Don’t like either backs we are trying to sighn.I’d rather keep Bell,and Pitt.This really throws me!I’m not a big fan of Gaffney either.We already have Chad Jackson,and He’s a better athlete.I hope were not gonna turn this team in to a resort for a bunch of reject Patriots.I’m trying to supportive,but really don’t get these moves.We need to fix the defense first period!!!!!!!!!!

Natural Wonder

by natural wonder on Feb 27, 2009 7:53 AM MST reply actions

yeah

that’s pretty much how a guy’s first HC gig goes usually…

Jason
The Hanging Curve

by poorboywilly on Feb 27, 2009 10:36 AM MST up reply actions

Money Waisted!

Could have been spent on D.Tired of the Broncos frugal approach.Is our team on wellfair or what?If we were gonna get a back why not Ward?

Natural Wonder

by natural wonder on Feb 27, 2009 7:59 AM MST reply actions

this is FA... we still have the draft (and a salary cap)

Simple answer on why not Ward… he’ll cost a lot more and we need the money to fill other holes. We’ll spend up to the salary cap this year, as we do EVERY year.

See my post below on why I think Arrington and Buckhalter are decent plays, and the point about them both being good receivers is also applicable.

Remember we still have the draft too… not spending money on Defensive FAs may simply mean we think the offensive needs we have are better suited to FA, because there a lot of guys on D we like in the draft…

Basically, lets see how it all plays out before we begin the whining….

by cjfarls on Feb 27, 2009 10:32 AM MST up reply actions

Both backs have good hands

This intensifies the odds that using backs out of the backfield as receivers will be a major part of McD’s offense. If so, the signings look interesting, depending on whether Buckhalter in particular passes the physical.

Hillis in '09

by Doc Bear on Feb 27, 2009 9:37 AM MST reply actions

posted on the DP "Bronco Bus" blog, but applicabale here too

I really like the idea of brining in Arrington and Buckhalter at RB. Check out the “speed score” article on footballoutsiders.com. They have a regression equation that is semi-predictive of RB success based on weight and combine numbers… lets just say they are unimpressed by this year’s RB draft class. So if true, a decent FA RB for depth behind Hillis et.al. may be a great option.

I really like Arrington. He underperformed his first couple years behind those putrid Cardnial run-blocking lines… however, he is built almost exactly the same as Marshawn Lynch, and put up comparable numbers during his time in the Pac-10… maybe he’s justy a late bloomer, or the Cardinal O-line really was that bad. Others have also said that towards the end of last year, he often looked better than Edge or Hightower in the Cardinal backfield. I think he’d be a great depth RB at least.

Buckhalter often looked good in Philly, but he’s kinda injury prone. I could see him as potentially good depth and/or camp fodder if the young guys like Torain don’t show anything/stay healthy. Similar to Pittman in many ways.

Gibril Wilson would of been a good pickup, but perhaps the front office likes what they see in the draft…

It definitely looks like so far, they’re covering the RB “need” in FA which could mean they like the defensive prospects in the draft more than the RB’s.

by cjfarls on Feb 27, 2009 10:27 AM MST reply actions