Who is Gabe Watson and why should we care.
by Broncoman on Feb 8, 2009 12:13 PM MST
Email
PrintAs was alluded to in a previous fan post, Gabe Watson may be our most significant free agent signing this season. Yes there will be clamoring for signing some big ticket players, but chances are that management will not be willing to invest large amounts of money in high ticket guys that will hinder our ability to sign our own free agents in the coming years. However, the defense will obviosly need a influx of talent, especially on the defensive line if the Broncos are to mount a serious attempt at another championship run.
With the likely shift to a 3-4 scheme, it is more than obvious that we will need a NT or two. Many have been clamoring for selecting BJ Raji in the 1st round, though this may happen, it looks like Raji may be gone before Denver selects. The next guys who look like legitimate NT are probably projected to be round 3-5 and will likely be three year projects. This leads us to the free agaent class. Again the class is very lean as far as true NT, some might project Haynesworth as a NT, but he is much more effective being a penetrating DT in a 4-3 scheme and it would be doubtful that Denver would be able to convince him to come here to assume the role of a space eater routinely taking on double teams. Going down the list of free agents, there are very slim pickins in the free agent market for a true 3-4 NT.
The name that stands out on the list is Gabe Watson of the Arizona Cardinals. Gabe Watson is 6-4, 340 and went to school at Michigan. Drafted in the 4th round of the 2006 draft, Watson has had a career marked by inconsistancy to say the least. Projected as a sure fire top ten pick prior to his senior season at Michigan, Watson countinuelly showed tremendous athletic flashes followed by long stretches of medicore play. Described as a dancing bear by many scouts due to his athletic ability, looking at game film, he never seems to match is ability with any consistency on the field. Listed as a back-up NT in Arizona, he has again frustrated coaches in Arizona by what can be a tremendous play on one down where he can simply be unblockable on one play and then get pushed out of the way in the next play. Simpley put, Watson physically is the most complete NT available (this includes Raji), the question will be can he be motivated to play to his emence talent.
The second question will be wether the Cardinals looks at putting a franchise tag on Watson. The cardinals obviously know that Watson has the talent and with a thin pool of NT and a lot of teams looking to get a quality NT, Watson's value will be far more than some of their other more talented free agents, such as Karlos Dansby, who though more talented, is generally a player that is easier to find. My guess is that there will be a urge to get Dansby signed quickly and then franchise Watson to force other teams such as the Broncos into a bidding war to pay the Cardinals some draft picks to sign him. So the question will be what will Denver or another team be willing to pay for Watson. Although it is doubtful that any team will pay nearly the price as say Cleveland or the Jets did for Kris Jenkins and Shaun Rogers since both of those players were more proven commidities; however, Watson has youth on his side being only three years into the NFL, now would be the time when Watson may bloom or wilt. If Denver does manage a deal for Watson, it will be critical that he is motivated, both through coaching and his contract, the talaent is there to be a pro-bowl NT, the question is the will there also.
This may be the biggest deal for Denver this offseason, in that it would surely signal that we will not draft a DL in the 1st round and it will likely mean that Maualuga, Curry, or Cushing will be selected by the Broncos in the 1st round.
This is a Fan-Created Comment on MileHighReport.com. The opinion here is not necessarily shared by the editorial staff of MHR
68 comments
|
6 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Nice post Broncoman...
Here is some other info on him:
"Watson is a third-year player who only played in 11 games this past season. He has good overall size and strength. He understands leverage and he can take on blocks effectively, stack at the line of scrimmage and get off in time to make plays. His pad level can get upright, but he has a strong lower body and good hand use at the point. His reactions to blocking schemes are inconsistent. He has good upper-body strength to play off contact, but he does get walled off quickly at times. His speed and range are limited to make plays outside his area. He has enough strength to hold his ground when taking on a double team. As a pass-rusher, he lacks good initial quickness and speed up field. Watson relies on power to push the pocket, but doesn’t have a wide variety of moves and will struggle to clear. Overall, he is better versus the run than the pass. He has the size and strength needed to be effective against the run, but will need to improve his reactions and use of leverage off the ball. "
This from ESPN.
I like him and Shaun Cody from USC who played in a 4-3 at Detroit but who was pretty dominating in college at USC in a 3-4.
Some info on Cody:
“Cody is a career backup who gives valuable depth along the defensive line. He has good size and initial quickness and can be explosive with his first step. He is at his best when on the move and is an effective interior stunter that can redirect and make plays along the line of scrimmage. He plays with good pad level and uses his hands well. Cody doesn’t have great power or strength to hold the point, especially versus double teams, but he does have quick hands to separate from blocker and leverage the ball. He needs to expand his pass rush package as he isn’t very active pressuring the quarterback. Cody appears to have talent to develop into a front-line player but hasn’t progressed as well as the Detroit front office would like. An injury that sidelined him in 2006 hindered his development and the 2008 season should show marked improvement.”
The other guy to look at is Colin Cole. Here is some info on him from ESPN as well:
“Cole is big, powerful and stout. He has the great strength to anchor the middle and works with a low center of gravity and good pad level. He often draws double-teams and still has the initial quickness and gap penetration to be disruptive. He can push the pocket, but he needs to expand his pass-rush arsenal. He lacks great hand use and has trouble separating from blockers. He doesn’t feel pad pressure well or work effectively to his gap responsibility. He has been more consistent in his effort lately, but even more improvement is needed. Cole was banged up and missed much of the season in 2007, but he has the talent to be a productive starter. Green Bay likely will try to re-sign Cole to keep their strong defensive line rotation well-stocked.”
These are our 3 best options, along with probably Tank Johnson.
At DE, I really would LOVE to see us go after Chris Canty…hes a beast and nwould bring an intsnt upgrade for us.
I think our D will be better than expected, but NT is the key!
Nice Broncoman and REC’D!
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
finding an NT
Phoenix may not let Watson go for a reasonable price, although they could have cap concerns which weigh in the decision. From what I understand, they can tender him as a higher pick and make him unaffordable, which would effectively keep him off the market till 2010. Of the three, Watson would be the best acquisition, but our best chance of getting him this year might be through a trade.
I’m not enthused about any of these FAs. Cody may respond to leaving Detroit’s dysfunctional situation but he has to be considered primarily as possible depth. He also looks more like a DE than a NT. Cole isn’t well regarded on our sister Packer site, Acme Packing Company, but he does appear to be testing the market. He reportedly turned down the Packers’ offer of 7 million for 3 years recently, so he appears to be set on testing the market.
Finding a long term starter at NT may not be possible this year. A rotational scheme — while not ideal — may be the best we can hope for.
I rarely engage in negative thinking but this NT crop is not making me happy. The best strategy may be to strengthen other areas on defense and consider NT as a long term project. I’d even like to see them keep Robertson on the team, albeit with a renegotiated contract. His past performance in the 3-4 is not a concern for me, although his knee still is.
Cards
Have Alan Branch (6-5 332 LBS) a 2nd RD pick from 07, so they may be willing to let him go. Franchising an underachiever with a capable replacement doesn’t seem likely, I hope. Great post.
The only difference between insanity and genius is perception.
The problem is (from the Cardinals perspective)
That Branch is probably a worse under achiever than Watson, he is very similar to Watson in tha they both are Michigan grads and have tremendous size and ability, but neither has really shown much. So though I don’t think Arizona will franchise Watson with the intent to resign him because of guys like Branch and Dockett, I do think they will want to force teams to pay them something for Watson before letting him go.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
If we are serious about fixing the defense
don’t you think the underachieving FA is the type of player we should be avoiding? Didnt read the whole post so i might be missing some key facts but from what i got hes been inconsistent, played in only 11 games over the last 3 years, and is a backup on a cardinals team that until the playoffs was decent, but nothing great. Idk, i have my apprehension.
Guys, here's the problems as I see it...
We are going to a 3-4…..even if we are transitioning and playing a hybrid we are going to need a NT type.
It is all very well to say, “Hes no good, neither is he, Raji is not worth a pick, Cole sucks, Cody’s a back up, Johnson has character issues…etc etc”
BEGGARS CANT BE CHOOSERS!!!
Our defense sucked last year, and we cant just hang out and wait for the best NT and not acquire anyone else.
Evene an average NT will allow us to bring in good DE’s like Chris Canty and allow us to play Thomas at DE. Our strengths are at LB, and if we draft Rey or Cush, our LB corps will be excellent.
We need a NT that will get us by, while stacking the other positions around it. We need to draft a NT that we can develop, get by with some stop gap solutions (that, who knows, may actually be players in a different environment) and understand that we are probably 2 years from seeing the finished product on defense.
We have to be pro active with regards to the NT position, and actually take some punts on guys that have potentila to be good, but for whatever rewason, have not flourished with their present teams.
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
I agree boydy...
We may need to get a stop gap NT in here till we have our 3-4 established. That may take till next year or the year after, but we can’t just sit on the fence and wait for a great one to fall into our laps.
I like your ideas about Cody, Cole, and Canty. I favored all three of these guys in a post that Steve O’ and I have coming up in the future. I feel Canty would be the home run signing, and both Cody and Cole have undisputed natural talent, and a change of scenery and scheme in the 3-4 may do wonders for both young players.
One question: With a Canty signing, the RDE position would surely go to him, so wouldn’t that put Thomas in a reserve rotational role with him? It seems like the other starting DE position would be open to a run stopper type like Powell, Crowder, or whoever we may draft. This would be a great opportunity for both Pow and Crow, and I will be pulling for Pow to win the job.
From there, I'd like to say that the wheels came off, but that wouldn't feel like an accurate description. The wheels didn't just magically come off, the Raiders all got out of the car, shot the wheels off the own car, busted out the taillights, smashed the windshield and poured Splenda in the gas tank. Then they all piled back inside and started screaming, "CAR WON'T MOVE, ME SAD NOW!" - MJD Yahoo Sports
I see Canty as a L-DE
Our ‘rush’ DE may still be out there. I’m not knocking the players currently on the team but part of the rebuilding task should be finding a good pass rushing DE34 and Canty looks like a solution for the other side. I want both Canty and that yet to be named R-DE.
Agreed....
Canty will be good left side. I think Thomas maybe able to develop.
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
a RDE currently
I didn’t bother to look up where the Cowboys were using him, although I think this issue came up in a previous discussion (perhaps on another site) on him. His size and low-ish sack totals strike me as more suited to R-DE. I’m looking at the situation in terms of attributes, as in — will he provide adequate pass rush? It’s more a question of what he can do than where we position him. I don’t mind him as a RDE but I was hoping to find a better pass rusher to man RDE and use Canty mostly at LDE. It’s also a situational question.
I agree
We will need a NT, good or not regardless of what we do, either we sign someone like Watson or Cody and maybe draft a work in progress later in the draft or we gamble and try to hope Raji falls to us and hope he turns into that special player.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
With the difficulty finding NT's...
the Card’s may tender a 1st or 2nd round qualifying offer. In that case would Big Gabe still be worth it? I think he would be a steal as a 3rd rounder.
From there, I'd like to say that the wheels came off, but that wouldn't feel like an accurate description. The wheels didn't just magically come off, the Raiders all got out of the car, shot the wheels off the own car, busted out the taillights, smashed the windshield and poured Splenda in the gas tank. Then they all piled back inside and started screaming, "CAR WON'T MOVE, ME SAD NOW!" - MJD Yahoo Sports
I asked a question of HT in another post...
And that is: If the NT is just servicable, can that be propped up by great DE and LB play?
Sometimes a change of scenery is the best thing for some players. Cody, for example, was a beast in the 3-4 at USC, but has sucked in Detroit (but who hasn’t). Cole and Watson could be the same.
I would give a 3rd for Watson as he has terrific upside, and pair him with Canty and/or Thomas and we are looking good, and our defense already looks markedly improved from last year.
My gut is that we have more “usable” players on our roster now that fit a 3-4 than a 4-3. Those that fit a 4-3 I wont be worried oif we lose.
I just posted a look at our roster in all positions as it relates to a 3-4 and I am cautioosly optimistic that if we can get a half decent NT we will be OK!
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
I agree
Unfortunately my post disappeared yesterday that said the same thing (prolly forgot to save it).
We’re probably not going to ‘fix’ NT this year although we can shore it up. We may draft the eventual solution this year but we’re not going to know whether or not we did until later.
Our best course of action is fix everything else on defense as much as possible. We’ve become a little too fixated with positional importance of the NT in the 3-4. That’s not to say it isn’t important but the crop of NTs isn’t conducive to fixing NT this year, so we have drop our “ideal” solution and look for a more juryrigged workable one.
I agree
the more I see, the more convinced I am that at best, we’ll get a project NT in this draft- someone who might become a quality starter in time.
Of course, I had similar doubts about our chances of finding a #2 receiver last year, and Goodman pulled Eddie Royal out of his hat.
In Goodman I trust.
"The crop of NTs isn’t conducive to fixing NT this year"
I wonder if it ever is. Even if we draft someone who turns out to be great at the position, how good would he be his first or even second year? Your third sentence, with which I fully agree, suggests that the answer is: not very. I suspect having a NT who looks halfway good his first year depends on having a defense that is solid everywhere else. In that case the rest of the defense will be carrying the NT, but until he’s ready to carry his own weight it’ll limit the defense’s upside. Our best bet, other than playing a hybrid system, a Phillips 3-4, or even a 4-3, is to pick up a FA who hasn’t yet contributed big for his team but who’s been in the league just long enough to be about to. Watson, who’s entering his fourth year, might be that player or he might not. We’ll have to get lucky and get someone with two or three years expeience who hasn’t made much of an impact yet, and who’s therefore affordable, but is on the verge of becoming a solid player. Since we don’t have an incumbent who can give us adequate play while a rookie (or two) develops, we might even want to pick up two FA NTs (if we can afford it) to increase our chances. Maybe one can be the backup for the other. But I wonder if we’ll even have a 3-4 with a two-gap NT this year, since it’s so iffy that we’ll find a situation in which we can get even adequate performance at the position.
"In the empty spaces - lacunae, vacuums, pauses, voids, black holes - new things begin. We are born anew from the unexplored space, the badlands, the outlaw territory." - Sam Keen
Getting one of these sounds like more FA failures
One of the problems during the Shanahan years was the selection of under performing FA’s with the thought that HE could turn them around. Wiegman was the only recent success and he was cut because of age. The list of underperformers that were going to change is too long to put in a post. Potential just means you haven’t done it yet and there is not reason to think these guys will miraculously change when they put on a Bronco uniform. Rather than putting more failures and underperformers on the roster I would rather see them work with low level draft choices and different 3/4 schemes. Branch and Watson were both rated highly by mock drafts but really fell when the teams evalutated them. No reason to think they are suddenly great again.
I certainly would not give up any draft choice for any of those. Look how good JG did last year. Would you trade Larson, Hillis or even Barrett for one of them?
Wiegman wasnt the only one
Dont forget Daniel Grahmn
Re: tender offers
I admit to not being well versed on this aspect of free agency. I’m still trying to figure out what constitutes the pick level for tender offers and how this is calculated. ( here’s something on the issue )
The Cards are NOT likely to tender Watson as a 4th rounder (his original selection) IMO, and would likely spend the extra money for one year to keep other teams from signing him and get more in return if he did get signed away. The real issue is whether they see themselves as spending too much on an asset that they could convert back into picks and help their team more elsewhere, and that’s particularly important if (a big IF) he’s intent on testing the market next year and they’re going to lose him anyway.
I don’t think the Franchise or Transition tags make sense for Arizona since it would lock them into a high salary for 3rd string player. It’s not simply a question protecting their asset since they could do that effectively for one year without creating a ‘salary bind.’ And it’s not merely cap room that’s an issue (they’re way under), but rather, the illogic of overpaying a depth player. The gist of the argument is that we can negotiate a trade now or wait a year. I don’t think we want to pay, for instance, a 2nd for him, and they’ll probably tender him that high.
Cole played this last year under a 2nd pick tender offer and appears to be set on testing the market this year. He’s reportedly rejected the Packers’ offer of 7 million for 3 years recently.
Of the three, Watson is probably the best, but he’s the least likely to be available. I normally avoid negative comments but I’m just as opposed to rose colored optimism, and I’m not happy with this crop. I think we have to shore up the position with the understanding that fixing NT is a long term project. I don’t think we can ignore any possibilities regarding NT at this point, and that includes using Robertson, assuming he’s healthy and also that a reasonable contract is negotiated.
We need to look at all NT options and make sure the players around said Nose Tackle are top quality
and hope the NT prospect we take in the draft is developed correctly. This is why I am not stoked to take BJ Raji with the 12th…..he will cost more than any of the 3 guys mentioned.
There are other prospects out there in FA, but they appear the best along with Tank Johnson, who I would stay away from due to character issues.
BJ Raji is just a big a gamble as taking a flier on Cole, Watson or Cody IMHO>
Thats why go some one in FA and look at Brace arounf the 3rd round!
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
cost
I’m not sure about the ‘cost’ since draftees can actually be cheaper is some respects, because they’re locked in for a period of time. It’ more a question of ‘when’ they’re drafted, and low picks are quite cheap but higher picks can be exorbitant if they don’t turn out but deals if they do (as in Clady).
There is a tension between avoiding risk and drafting high enough. That’s why many of us would love to have scads of high middle-ish round picks. I’d love to covert all our value in picks into picks from the 2nd round to 4th.
Agreed...
Thats why I like Brace in 3rd round more than paying a high price for Raji with the 12th overall pick.
Thoughts?
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
that's the dilemma
And moreover, we may not have have the opportunity to pick Raji so it could be our only option.
Some people see Raji as worth the risk, it’s more a question of how you see him. There’s always risk. Avoiding risk lessens negative outcomes but it also lessens positive ones. Our goal is to find a starting NT and that’s hard to do unless we use a ‘higher’ pick.
I’ve advocated in the past (before the coaching/scheme change) that we take DTs in the 2-4 round range under exactly the same line of reasoning. It’s a compromise between lessening risk and still picking high.
I think we should try to find a NT of sufficient quality in the FA market and then see what the draft delivers. Our options would be less forced in that scenario. We could still take Raji at #1 if the staff considers him draft-worthy at that spot, or we could target some of the others in the early rounds. We can only set goals since everything is contingent upon availability in the draft. There’s also “if/then” contingencies that raise or lower needs depending on earlier picks. We can’t lock into a single scenario. There are multiple paths.
The 12th pick
I still think that the 12th pick should be based on ranking not on position. Draft for need in round 4+ but draft someone who has a great chance to stengthen the overall team in rounds 1-3. We get too hung up on need. If need and ability cross its a great pick ie Clady or if not trade to it ie Cutler. Otherwise, just take the highest guy on your board and fill in the needs in the later rounds. There are some good prospects that were listed in the NT article that can fill our needs. We won’t find a “NT savior” as a rookie anyway. DT has a long learning curve at the NFL level.
But you still have to draft based on position or need.
We wouldn’t pick a quarterback or left tackle in the first three rounds, even though they are the highest on our board, would we? If we did, that sounds like a faulty draft strategy.
Cards won't franchise Watson
And the reason is named Karlos Dansby.
The Cardinals have a slew of free agents, the most important of whom is Karlos Dansby. Watson is not nearly high enough on their radar to get a franchise tag.
I hate Michigan defensive linemen, which is the reason I am not big on Terrance Taylor, they always have super athletic ability the working mentality of a three-toed sloth.
Agree about Dansby
Although Watson missed alot because of freak injury on a treadmill. He has come back from that injury and looked good late in the year.
Taylor
I agree but I would look at Taylor in the 4+ round. It would be better than reaching for Raji at the 12th position if you don’t really feel he has the ability to be in that position. As Gil Brandt said “DE’s are drafted 17 picks before their ability in his research”. I wonder if DT’s are getting to the same point. Remember Jarvis Moss at 17. He may end up being a good player with some time (hopefully before his contract is up) but he was not a savior. Let’s not make the same mistake with Raji. Let’s trust Goodman to get the best available at 12 or trade out of the position.
Let's get a few things straight!
1. The Cards DO NOT play a 3-4. If you watch, they play an Under-shifted 4-3. I know a lot of the MSM describes them as a 3-4 but that’s a reflection of their ignorance. Sometimes I wonder if they’re even watching the actual games.
2. Watson isn’t a NT. Again, if you watch he is just a LDT playing in a 1-technique, and an under-performing one at that. I know he lines up over center, but there’s more to being a NT than just lining up over center. Heck Al Wilson used to line up over center all the time, didn’t make him a NT either.
3. I’d say there’s less than 50-50 odds that we go to a 3-4 next year. Goodman is saying is unlikely, McD is saying it’s unlikely…
4. No way the cards want to make Watson one of the 5 highest paid DTs (that’s what happens when you franchise a player) so it’s doubtful they would do that. They could tag him as transitional but that still makes him one of the 10 highest paid DTs.
5. How does yet another under-performing FA help this team?
by SlowWhiteGuy on Feb 8, 2009 3:20 PM MST reply actions 1 recs
Cards
Ted posted this link originally:
http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/Features/Super+Bowl/2008/wwhi013009.htm
It describes the differences between the 3-4 and the Cards form of defense – facinating stuff.
In Goodman We Trust
by Doc Bear on Feb 8, 2009 3:44 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
Awesome Bear and SWG...
Very interesting. IS that what we are heading to you think? Would the under suit our guys and does it take away from the need for a TRUE NT?
Maybe this is where we are headed!!!
Thoughts guys.
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
I'll jump in
The best solutions for bringing in the personnel for a 3-4 still fall short of ‘sufficient to run the scheme well.’ This is why I was happy to see the reports on McDaniels’ comments to the effect that our transition to a 3-4 would take place in a longer time frame than has been reported in the media.
We’ll probably switch to a 3-4 in time, but forcing the switch without the personnel would be an invitation to disaster. I expect we’ll see some 3-4 ‘looks’ as we did this year but it would be foolish to believe that a scheme change without adequate personnel would improve our defense.
I predict that we’ll see some changes in the type of player we draft, which will be an indication of where we’re going in the future, but the changes will be somewhat subtle rather than dramatic.
If more of us knew what a hybrid scheme looked like then the cognitive template for this discussion would change. A better guide than scheme-appropriateness might be player-type, although I won’t attempt to explain this idea here. I think everyone here should put their assumptions about our moving to the 3-4 scheme on hold and take a look at this article on New England football strategy. The section on philosophy and multiple schemes hold some clues.
What do you think of the scheme that Arizona is running at the link Doc gave us?
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
'Ski
The Cards material is only for interest – I expect a different form of a hybrid. However, the material from Wiki is mostly on the Fairbanks-Bullough – do you expect us to transition in that direction? We seem to run to a lighter, coverage LB, although HT points out that we can run either and adapt to personnel with scheme.
In Goodman We Trust
re; hybrid
I wasn’t looking at your linked information when I posted on the New England Patriot strategy so any similarities are coincidental.
I’m trying break out the “box” we’ve placed over the next draft that we’ve constructed since a change to a 3-4 was strongly hinted at by the new staff. I’ve posted the link on NE before, and I still think it holds clues to what we’ll be running scheme-wise, that is — multiple schemes.
Philosophy ,,,,,
- Their multiple schemes intended to take advantage of their opponent’s weaknesses.38
I think we’ll be seeing a lot of different looks, an unpredictable defense. When I first posted this article it was shortly after the coaching change, and what struck me at that time was a philosophy of adapting the defense to the opponent and using your defensive players’ abilities as a guide to crafting the defense. Parts of this were on a TV show I saw around that time. New England’s defense, at one point, was crafted to use the strengths of it’s players, It could be called a combination of a 3-4 and 4-3 or a multiple scheme.
I don’t know what they’ll be running next year but I know they can’t run a 3-4 on a full-time basis yet. My guess is that Nolan will try to adapt the scheme to the players’ abilities. I don’t think a radical change is in the works yet but the look may be different at times. I’d rather see them confuse the offense than themselves.
Nice post 'ski!
And thanks for reading info on the Pat’s scheme….I will get to it and probably hit you back with questions.
Thanks for all the knowledge mate!
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
look to New England
I think the previous posts can be condensed down to two main points; (1) look to New England, and for defense, too (2) it’s a philosophy, a way of doing things, not just a scheme.
I think we’ll start to see the Bronco organization take on characteristics of it’s Head Coach, which necessarily draws on his experiences in New England.
Yep...
It was a good read on philosophy on both sides of the ball, the philosophies roots and the coaching tree associated with it.
Wikpedia is a good sight.
I am looking forward to a lot different and exciting looking team!
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
N E hybrid
Just to extend my thoughts, and I don’t ‘know’ what we’ll see scheme-wise but it’s fun to speculate:
A true hybrid defense is one that will use either package on any down — and in any game. The defensive coaches who are truly in the hybrid business will look closely at an opponent and take advantage of the best matchup they get during a particular game. Hybrid coaches feel they make their opponent prepare for every possible look and then they dictate what works best for them. While it makes sense, pulling it off isn’t that easy. If it were, then everyone would be doing it.
There’s much more and it’s certainly an interesting read. I do think it will take time to implement, so I don’t look at a short transition time. If we do it, it should also bear Nolan’s stamp, too.
Thanks, 'Ski
Lots of great links to great articles right now. The MHR members are the best anywhere!
In Goodman We Trust
Well my feeling is that Watson fits the mold and skill set for a 3-4 NT
Wether you call him a DT or a NT, the fact is his value is as a NT, not as a DT, plus the Cards already have Alan Branch sitting on the roster so I expect that is who they want to step up. Now the thing is with a transition or franchise player doesn’t mean you have to sign them unless negotiations go beyond a deadline, it also means that the player can sign a lower deal and then get traded, you have a period to negotiate with them, basically it will allow for the Cards to play a game of chicken and not let him walk for free, all it does is make sure that another team won’t sign him and not give up something serious for that player.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
I dont know...
There is NO way that the Broncos are going to say they are or are not going to a 3-4….thats the nature of the business.
We are going to get a couple of NT/ DT types, regardless of scheme, as I still believe we are transitioning to a 3-4 scheme, and will probably play some hybrid mix of 3-4/ 4-3 this year.
Watson is an example of the type of guy we may seek out this FA period, but is not the only guy out there.
There is also a saying that someones trash is another man’s treasure. There are talented guys out there that just dont fit a system, but who could be great in another. They will be the type of guys we seek.
Thanks SWG….great points and a good discussion!
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
by boydy2669 on Feb 8, 2009 3:31 PM MST reply actions 1 recs
I agree, it may be what is termed transition, but all indications are that Denver will be a 3-4 team
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
It all comes down to....
personnel. If the Broncos can get the personnel they think they need ( a stretch since there don’t seem to be any good NTs available) then they may go to a 3-4. If the personnel available lend themselves to a different scheme then that’s the direction we will take. No matter how you cut it, I don’t see Watson as the caliber of player to base that decision on.
My Mock Draft 1-9 What's Your's?
1.Rey Maualunga,USC .2.Delmas,WM.3.Ron Brace,BC.4.Andre Brown,NCST.4.Rasad Jennings,Liberty.5. Joseph Frantz,FAU.6.Kyle Mores,USC.6.Hodge,TCU.7.Mckinley,South Carolina.
Natural Wonder
BTW: Great Research!
I don’t want to sound completely negative here. It takes a lot of work to put together a post like this and I for one appreciate it.
NT is priority #1
Denver can’t go by for two or three years with a “stop-gap.” They have to either get Raji at #12 or move up to get him! I would be willing to go as high as our 1st and 2nd to get him. We then would have to sign a safety in free agency, but it would help greatly.
Denver has ability on the DL other than NT. Thomas, Ekuban, Crowder and Peterson can all play DE in a 34 set. They only need a NT to solidify the DL.
Raji would be to Denver what Ngata is to Baltimore and Hampton is to the Steelers. D.J. Woodyard, and Dumervil would be free to roam!
Watson is a UFA
According to Scout.com, Gabe Watson is an unrestricted free agent, which would mean that unless he is franchise tagged the Broncos would not be required to give any compensation for his services. I searched around, and I couldn’t find any confirmation whether he was a UFA or an RFA, but you could be right. Normally, a player selected in the third round or later is given a three year rookie contract, and like many other players in the 2006 draft they become restricted free agents when that third year has expired. Again, I’m not saying I know something, I’m just letting you know that according to scout.com he is a UFA.
I also read that
I just think that the Cards are going to franchise him so that another team will have to pay up, not to resign him, I think they would rather have Branch step up than have to resign Watson at a starter salary.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
Here's some more info
If the player is offered a minimum of the average of the top five salaries of last season at his position, or 120 percent of the player’s previous year’s salary, he becomes a "non-exclusive" franchise player and can negotiate with other clubs. His old club can match a new club’s offer, or receive two first-round draft choices if it decides not to match. The signing period for non-exclusive franchise players to sign with new clubs is March 3 through November 9 (10th week of the season).
• A transition player has received a minimum offer of the average of the top 10 salaries of last season at the player’s position or 120 percent of the player’s previous year’s salary, whichever is greater.
• A transition player designation gives the club a first-refusal right to match within seven days an offer sheet given to the player by another club after his contract expires. If the club matches, it retains the player. If it does not match, it receives no compensation. Transition players can be signed from March 3 through July 22
As you can see, basically a club can designate the player a franchise or transition player, but in all reality they really don’t have to sign them until well into July, which gives them time to negotiate with other teams to get a deal done, and it does not mean that they can’t sign them to a long term deal at a lower price, only that the player has to get a minimum contract for that value if nothing else and that the player can’t go and sign with another team unless the other team will forfeit some draft picks.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
by Broncoman on Feb 9, 2009 4:31 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
Looking at The current Roster
I see a couple of guy’s who may bloom. Nic Clemons will be going into His 3rd season and at 6’6" 300 He may be able to beef up and be good at NT. I don’t know who Mathias Askew is or how good He would be, but same thing this will be His 4th season and at 6’5" 302 He to could add some weight, although I see He has had some knee issue’s. Who’s got some real info on these guy’s?
Tactics without Strategy is the noise you hear before Defeat!
We don't.
It is better to keep silent, and appear to be wise, then to ramble on and remove all doubt! The Wisest Man, Solomon.
Question for the group?
Isn’t the idea of a NT to hold the point of attack?
Didn’t C. Powell in college have unbelievable “run stuffing” stats. I googled it an low and behold it brought me right back to MHR…
Here is a quote from MHR member Denver Diehard
Is Powell the steal of the draft? I didn’t look at this guy before the draft, and at first said "Carlton who?". After crunching google and reading up on Powell’s stats, I’m wondering why he didn’t go higher ? ?
He has some impressive run stopping stats. He must have some pretty good tackling skills to have negative yardage against. He sounds like a brick wall.
Why can’t Powell be the Brickwall point of attack?
"I am not trying to start anything I am just saying that i think if you take Knowshon and draft D later you guys will be hella good next year" ...IamtheGreatest - The smartest Chiefs fan I ever had the priviledge of reading!
Yeah Steve O....
My gut feeling is they are already beefing him up for next season.
His frame will hold more weight, and he was VERY used to double teams in college and always found his way into the backfield.
Add to this that he is lifting more weight than any time in his career. This leads me to think they are building him into a NT/DT type….just my gut as I have said but he could be that dude we are looking for!
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
I think you R right man!
It is better to keep silent, and appear to be wise, then to ramble on and remove all doubt! The Wisest Man, Solomon.
Maybe
It’s just hard for me to have too much faith in someone who hasn’t taken an NFL snap, hopefully that may be an option, but he may translate more into a DE in a 3-4.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
Good points
You’re absolutely right about being unproven..
"I am not trying to start anything I am just saying that i think if you take Knowshon and draft D later you guys will be hella good next year" ...IamtheGreatest - The smartest Chiefs fan I ever had the priviledge of reading!
Agreed.....
But is not BJ Raji and all the other prospects coming out unproven as well???? At least with Powell they have him in the fold, he is lifting weights, has as much proof in college (if not more) than Raji and is a consistent performer at the point of attack and has a history of getting into the back field when double teamed.
Just like Ryan Harris was last year, Carlton Powell is like a bonus draft pick that already has knowledge of the team.
I see nothing bu positives in this situation at the moment.
If he can perform as well as Harris did last year, we have a MAJOR problem solved!!!
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
Totally agree
It looks like Powell has recovered from his injury, lifting a lot of weights (his injury was in training camp so he’ll have a whole year to recover, plus both Brandon Stokely and Ekuban went through the same injury – Achilles tear – so he’s got people to talk to about it). It’s true he had no playing time last year, but I think it is huge to have been with the team for a year. The mental shock of just being in the NFL and getting to know the players around you is, I think, a big reason why rookies too often play like rookies.
I have two fingers (one blue, the other orange) crossed for Carlton Powell as our NT.
Truly the light is sweet, and a pleasant thing it is for my eyes to behold the sun.
Ecclesiastes
our sister site's take
The best resource on these subjects is usually just like us, only fans of (fill in the blank).
From Revenge of the Birds.
Great lead, 'Ski
I keepsaying that… ;-)
You know, Terrelle Smith really appeals to me. He is looking for a team that wants to use him a little more – I’m hoping that McD will give him that slot. It would take care of our issues at FB (and give Larsen a chance at LB).
In Goodman We Trust
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Getting Social With MHR
Web Stuff
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
