MHR University Special Report - A Profoundly Powerful Draft Strategy (2009)
Every great magic trick consists of three parts or acts.
The first part is called "The Pledge". The magician shows you something ordinary: a deck of cards, a bird or a man. He shows you this object. Perhaps he asks you to inspect it to see if it is indeed real, unaltered, normal. But of course... it probably isn't.
The second act is called "The Turn". The magician takes the ordinary something and makes it do something extraordinary. Now you're looking for the secret... but you won't find it, because of course you're not really looking. You don't really want to know. You want to be fooled. But you wouldn't clap yet.
Because making something disappear isn't enough; you have to bring it back. That's why every magic trick has a third act, the hardest part, the part we call "The Prestige".
-From the movie "The Prestige"-
Denver scored on this draft in so many ways it would be difficult to make a credible case against it. Denver brought in solid players (indeed, players considered the best at what they do), and brought in youth where Denver is thin (where Denver has aging players). While homemade draft boards are based entirely on who folks want at a given position, Denver followed the successful Patriots strategy of going for best available, a concept that always confounds mock drafts.
Denver not only caused confusion amongst the "my player or it must be a bust" crowd, but doubled down on the type of draft they had last year (where Denver also confused the "need-based" crowd, but scored with solid picks). If Denver had used the drafting style favored by the Patriots like they did this year and last, Denver would be further along by now.
Read further to see the point illuminated.
In fact, midway through this epic, long article I promise to share the "meaning of life" I discovered for this team, and I'll do it in giant, bold, easy-to-find print.
It is worth repeating again (a quote I made before the draft started):
People forget the natural progression of draft day.
1) The team likely makes several picks that few people saw coming.
2) Fans are flabbergasted!
3) On further reflection (about 3 or 4 days after the draft) folks research the new players, and find that they were great picks all along.
4) When camp rolls around, reports on the rookies are stellar (for the most part).
5) Everyone now thinks the draft went great.
One thing to keep in mind: for all of the sleep we have all lost trying to mock and analyze the draft, the pros in the war room have done several hundred more times worth of effort and research. I’m prepared to give my opinions tomorrow, but in the context that I trust the coaching / management staff to know more about what’s going on behind closed doors than I do.
When I coached at the HS level, locals sometimes questioned a decision we made as a staff. We had the advantage of years of coaching, an (always) winning program, up front and personal insights into what was "really" going on in the locker room, at practice, and in the private lives of the players. But there were always folks that seemed to "know better" than we did.
Now I’m on the fan side of things. I’m going to question some decisions, but always with the respect that goes with knowing the team’s coaches really do know more than I do.
This is why I avoid making mock predictions, and why I leave draft boards and college players to others with more skill than I have. I focus on the result of the actual draft, and make my case there.
A Draft is Not What it Seems...
The draft is like a lottery, and it is a grand illusion. Folks think that the purpose of a draft is to build a team through bringing in young talent. That sounds like it makes sense, but it ignores what a draft really is.
The pledge...
The turn...
The prestige...
The draft is a system of probability. For example, if we were using money as the base for discussion, the first round is like buying 500,000 lottery tickets, and hoping one of them pays off. A lower round is like buying less tickets. You can hit in any round (with any batch of tickets), but you have a higher probability of hitting with a bigger batch.
Most folks look at the draft as if a certain player is the winning ticket. In their mind, this player is already worth the million dollar payoff. But this is an error in thinking. Teams spend picks on a system of probable payoff based on a system of odds. Those odds dictate (like a lottery) that a pick of a particular candidate (or ticket) may win or lose. You minimize your odds of winning by picking a ticket based on need, but increase your odds if you pick your ticket based on probable payoff. What does this mean?
Let's say you "need" a nose tackle. Many in the media and the fan base immediately look at the "best" nose tackles in the draft. Each of these nose tackles has a probability of success. But such an approach limits the pool of success to just one player (or slightly better, one position). If none of those players has a high-end chance of success, a wise team will pass on the position.
Here is an extreme example to make a point. Let's say we still have Jay Cutler at QB. Let's also say that we have a terrible NT. Most folks will say, "We need to draft a NT, and the QB position is safe". The illusion comes crashing down with a misdirection. What if the team has scouted and found a young LaDainian Tomlinson at the RB position? NOBODY considered the RB position, because we don't have a need. The QB position is considered safe, the NT position is considered a need. The RB position wasn't even considered - at all! It never entered the discussion!
So folks will take several paths. Many will complain that the need wasn't met. That's okay. Many will complain that the player they penciled in wasn't taken. That's okay, too. Many will declare the draft a failure. That's okay. Some will result to name calling. That's okay, if you are on a low-class message board. It won't fly at MHR. But many will say, "This player is more of a sure thing, even if he wasn't the pick that was expected".
What has really happened in the example? The team has picked up the "best" player based on the probability that the player will succeed (a young LT), regardless of the position he plays. Had the team picked up seven NTs in the draft, though none was scouted as probable for success, would that have done any good? In the line of thinking that "the team needs a NT", the fallacy enters the thinking when the fan (or expert) assumes that one of these "tickets" will pay off. The catch is that it isn't likely to. One "Tomlinson" ticket is more likely to pay off because he is rated as the most likely to succeed regardless of position. Seven NT tickets are not likely to succeed because they aren't rated on a probability to win, but rated on a desire to see a certain player or position (which limits the pool).
Let's look at the '09 Denver draft, and apply this principle.
Denver's Picks - The Pledge
via static.nfl.com
Knowshon Moreno - Your new RB
Use the context I have provided, and drop the mental trap of being in a paradigm based on positional need. This is the best running back in the draft.
This is RB Moreno. He is something Denver has NEVER had (based on probability).
-
Moreno had only two full campaigns with his college team as the starter. Despite that, he averaged 105 yards gained per game, and nearly broke every RB record with the team.
-
He is an every-down RB, and a one-cut specialist. This fits Denver's zone-block scheme, but now we are using a high-end talent instead of "just any RB who will gain 1000+ in our system". Imagine what a true franchise RB could do in the system, instead of a sixth- or seventh-round talent as we are used to.
-
Is considered so strong at receiving, he can be split out wide as a receiver. Think about that for a moment. No, really. Pause and think about that.
Now go read this page at NFL.com. Click on both the "overview" and "analysis" buttons. The first thing you will notice is a storm of positive scouting reports, and a thin, one line negative.
Denver just took the highest-probability RB that they have ever picked since the zone-block system came to Denver.
They also denied that player to the one team that really wanted him - SD (division rival). Denver now has that player for (likely) a decade.
Some will still argue need, and we can point out that the rest of the RB roster (including favorites like Torain and Hillis) spent last season on injured reserve. But forget insurance. This kid is the starter. Also, consider that the shelf life of Denver's RBs just skyrocketed, because despite having an every-down back, we can spell each of the RBs during a game with a dangerous speed threat over several, bruising-style RBs.
This pick helps to provide cover for our new QBs, because the ground game will:
- Wear down defenses,
- Cause defenders to move to the line to stop the run.
It will aid the defense too, because:
- Denver can now control the clock.
And why does this pick aid our new system, instead of just addressing a non-system-based need?
Denver will be using the 3-WR set as its base offensive-formation (like the Patriots and even the Colts do). This means no FB as a lead blocker. This means a need for an elite RB who can catch or run better than most. Hillis (a favorite of mine) will still be a short-yardage specialist, and an excellent spell for Moreno. But on typical downs, Moreno is the type of threat that keeps a defense from being allowed to focus on the idea that three receivers are on the field.
This player is likely the face of the Broncos offense for years to come. Remember the last Georgia Bulldog that played RB with John Elway? That's right. Davis was the help that Elway needed to finally win two Super Bowls.
via static.nfl.com
Robert Ayers - Your new DE
So you want to fix the defense? The front seven in particular? Got it. Denver took the best player available again, and this guy happened to be a LB/DE (I'll be addressing him as a DE, because he is heavily projected to play DE in Denver).
Here's what you need to know. Depending on who you read or listen to, he has been called "the best defensive player in the draft" or just "the best defensive lineman in the draft".
Let's get the major criticism out of the way. He doesn't get a lot of sacks. Fine. I've written on this before. "SACKS ARE FOR FANS, PRESSURE IS FOR COACHES".
Let me put on my defensive-coordinator hat and break this down. Ayers is not intended to be a sack artist, anyway. His job as an outside two-gap DE will be to occupy an offensive tackle and (perhaps) a tight end (sometime an OT and OG). What Ayers does is critical. He creates pressure, which in the 3-4 system that Denver will run (Fairbanks-Bullough) will allow the LBs a lane to the QB. Moreover, Ayers brings something else to the table - the long lost art of stopping the run for the Denver Broncos.
His is a position that won't shine or get credit (with fans). He'll be tying up two opposing players so that someone else gets the glory. Those who are critical of his sack numbers have never coached a down of football.
Pressure leads to turnovers. It leads to offensive errors. It leads to bad throws, and it leads to botched handoffs to the RB. It leads to fumbles and interceptions. Sacks are nice, and big crowd-pleasers. But any coordinator or coach will tell you, "I'll take a pocket pressure over a sack any day". A sack is only the result of good pressure. But it is the least desirable of many other alternatives (such as turnovers).
Ayers is a pressure machine. He instantly upgrades the linebackers by tying up the line, and makes the job of the NT slightly easier.
He's also versatile. The poor guy got moved all over the place at TENN, but can play anywhere on the front 7. Like the other picks, he's a team leader and has good character.
NFL.com gets the probability matrix:
Could be an ascending player who is just beginning to scratch the surface of his vast potential.
Denver's Picks - The Turn
So far, fans were okay with the draft. But when Denver made the next pick, many fans became confused. But this pick was what made me realize what Denver was doing. I closely watched the rest of Denver's picks over the weekend. It became clearer with each pick. I had been fooled. But I was thrilled. I got it. I got it, and I understood completely what Denver was now doing.
via static.nfl.com
Alphonso Smith - Your new CB
What? A CB? some fans were confused. Some became angry. Some became inappropriate. Me? I was shocked too.
A good coach recovers quickly, and tries to find an answer. Sometimes the answer is ugly. Sometimes, it is elusive. Sometimes (as with a couple of picks later in the draft) it is just disappointing. But what I found after my initial shock were two things.
- We got a player that you won't believe (once you've read the following), and
- We were now fully embarked on a system of drafting that has kept the NE Patriots on top of a league that is built to maintain parity.
Once again, we got a "best". Best RB, best defensive player (or d-lineman, depending on whom you read), and now "best intercepting, ball hawker".
Big deal? Read the following, again from NFL.com:
Smith is just the third player this century to amass 20 or more interceptions in a career, joining Jim Leonhard of Wisconsin (21, 2001-04) and Mitch Meeuwsen of Oregon State (20, 2001-04), and only the second in Atlantic Coast Conference annals to reach that lofty mark (Dre' Bly of North Carolina had 20, 1996-98). Only nine other players in the history of college football (all levels) have produced more interceptions in a career than Smith.
Smith is just the third player this century to amass 20 or more interceptions in a career, joining Jim Leonhard of Wisconsin (21, 2001-04) and Mitch Meeuwsen of Oregon State (20, 2001-04), and only the second in Atlantic Coast Conference annals to reach that lofty mark (Dre' Bly of North Carolina had 20, 1996-98). Only nine other players in the history of college football (all levels) have produced more interceptions in a career than Smith.
That's enough to make a grown defensive coordinator cry. It's also enough to make a grown offensive coordinator throw up on his play chart.
We could stop there and be in awe of this kid. But there's more...
What makes Smith even more valuable at his position is his ability to make big plays in the backfield. Few cornerbacks, much less ones that stand just 5-feet-9 can boast having nine sacks, 23.5 tackles behind the line of scrimmage and eight forced fumbles on those hits during a career. He also adds to his resume as a capable kickoff returner, averaging 20.7 yards for his career, along with using his superb leaping ability and timing to block five kicks during his time at Wake Forest.
I agree with several other MHR staffers. This kid is the steal of the draft, even if he isn't a "position of need". But there's more.
Read this link at NFL.com. The kid also block punts, is a monster in the return game, and is a sack machine from the CB position.
Do you understand why I laugh when people say, "But he's too short"? Positional need? No. Not on a team with Bailey, Dawkins, Hill, and Goodman. But consider two points -
- We can now add an elite, dangerous nickelback to the field. Now, all five DBs on the field in a nickle are monsters.
- Those four DBs I mentioned? All of them are over 30, and contracts are coming up.
And one more point. MHR has a soft spot for Darrent Williams, who was gunned down and taken from us and his family. Darrent Williams gave his time and money to children without hope. Darrent Williams was going to be the next Champ Bailey. Darrent Williams had the wit of Shannon Sharpe, the hairstyle of "Pink" (a mohawk), the skills of a young Bailey, and the heart of a gentle lion. Darrent Williams was a man.
So listen closely, because I'm only going to say this once:
Darrent Williams was short. At 5'8" he was an inch shorter than Alphonso Smith. If anyone wants to talk about height when a player clearly performs at an elite level, you'll get little mercy in the arena of debate with MHR members. From me? You'll get a can of whooped tail that you'll never recover from. Don't even step on the field.
Denver's Picks - The Prestige
via static.nfl.com
Darcel McBath - Your New Safety
This proved it. Denver threw "need" out the window and took players with high impact. Dawkins is 36, though still playing at a Hall of Fame-level. All of our DBs (as mentioned earlier) are in their 30s.
But many fans see that safety is not a "need", and will not understand the pick. We already have our starters at safety, right? I agree. We need a NT, right? Yep. I've even written that all needs beyond NT are a distant second. I understand.
But a pick on a NT with a low probability of success is a wasted pick. This isn't MADDEN, where you can increase a player's stat from nothing to legendary overnight (so I'm told. I confined my coaching to real players). Denver proved what I was understanding after the third pick.
It is all about probability, and being a "best" at something. This kid is a ball-hawking safety. What he is best at is something Denver hasn't had in ages. This kid is the best deep-coverage safety in the draft. And anyone who reads my work at MHR (or has read Styg50's thoughts on the safety position) will understand something right away. Denver has ignored the use of the classic "deep coverage" safety for far too long (two years). So strong are his deep-coverage, zone skills that the term "center fielder" comes up in more than one site's analysis of this player.
His weaknesses don't matter if he plays as a deep-cover safety. Height (been there, dispelled that) is an issue that is supposed to move him up close to a box-safety position, where he is unable to play man against anybody well and unable to shed blockers (his two, true weaknesses). But he isn't a box safety now, is he?
His deep cover skills are excellent:
- He keeps the play in front of him,
- tackles well in open space, and
- reads the play
Those are all of the skills I look for in my favorite position on the football field. He also has what I have written many times is the "frosting on the cake" for a safety. He has good hands, and gets interceptions. If you read MHR University, you know that fans want good hands at safety, but defensive coordinators are more concerned with the other three skills I just described. But to have those 3 skills AND good hands?
Jackpot.
From NFL.com:
It's easy to understand how a defensive player can fly under the radar when he plays for a team with one of the most prolific offenses in the nation.
That didn't stop Darcel McBath from being one of the best playmakers in the Big 12. Having to practice against a top offense -- namely sophomore WR Michael Crabtree -- is sure to help any defensive back hone their coverage skills. McBath, a former cornerback, was the Red Raiders' secondary anchor at the demanding free safety position since shifting there as a sophomore, going on to start his final 39 games.
The opposition, often playing from behind and passing on most every day, challenged the middle of Tech's defense last season. McBath more than stood up to the challenge, pulling in seven interceptions that included a school season-record tying two returns for touchdowns. Six of his seven pass deflections came on third-down plays.
A safety that anchors the defense, instead of a left cornerback? 7 interceptions in a season?
That's right, fellow fans. Denver has moved away from the system-less '08 season, and the failed experiment at "contain" football in '07. Enter now the Fairbanks-Bullough at the front seven, and a "ball-hawking, interception-prone" attitude at the defensive positions - for years to come.
>>>>>>No more changing systems from year to year. We have the best players based on a system, not need.......
....and that my friends is The Prestige.<<<<<<<
That is the answer to our draft strategy questions, and the new meaning of life for the Denver Broncos. Do I like all of the picks? No. I'll have some critical comments in a moment. Do I like the strategy? Yes. Hell yes.
via static.nfl.com
Richard "Big Rich" Quinn - Your New Blocking TE
Again, stunned fans. "We have Graham, we have Scheff. In a pinch, we even have Putzier! What gives?"
Okay, set aside Daniel Graham's age and contract. People focused on need over "best" will too. Big Rich (he already comes with an existing nickname, so MHR readers can save a little time) is the best blocking TE in the draft. Why is this "system critical" for a team focused on system over need?
Because our RB will be running out of 3-receiver sets. He won't have a lead blocker. In passing situations, our QB won't have a FB in to pass block. Against 3-4 defenses, our two TE sets will be the only thing between our QB and the OLBs.
The answer is to pass on other players on the board, and even other TEs. Denver saw the best blocking-TE was left, and pulled the trigger. You don't have to like the pick. You don't. You just have to recognize the system that the Patriots Broncos are running, and realize that the best player on the board (that fits the system, offense or defense) is still there.
Folks will be critical of his reception ability. It's the only critical issue of him as a TE. Fine. Big Rich is not supposed to go out there and catch the ball. Like Ayers (who isn't supposed to get sacks) or McBath (who isn't supposed to be a box safety), the criticisms fall away when the player is meant to be part of a team-focused system that eschews individualism. Moreno is going to be a star. Smith is going to be a star. Quinn, McBath, and Ayers are going to make stars out of their teammates.
It doesn't stop with the 5 jewels in the crown Denver got in the first two rounds.
via static.nfl.com
David Bruton - Your New(er) Safety
The first pick that I didn't like. That's right; I can love the draft strategy, and love most of our picks, and still not like them all. And you know what else? I can dislike the pick, but still understand it.
Bear in mind that our starting CBs and SAFs are all in their 30s, and this pick makes sense. MHR points out that Bruton makes sense because, "...Denver will have lots of options when it comes to structuring rosters, and more importantly, contracts."
But I dissent from MHR's comment: "Yet another DB to add to the backfield, and it makes you wonder just how much confidence Denver has in the current crop." I think Denver is very, very happy with the current crop of Bailey, Dawkins, Hill, and Goodman (and nickelback / future #2 Smith). I think Bruton (like McBath) are for future talent.
But McBath can compete right away to start. Bruton won't. Bruton (like every other player we took in this draft) is a character guy and a leader (a team captain, like a few of our other picks). Like McBath, he is a deep-zone coverage guy that would struggle in the box. His athleticism is excellent. But his skills are average. I don't think he was the best player on the board at this point. Again, I'm not focused an any position in particular (everyone, including me, would have liked to have seen a NT, no matter how many better players were available).
I don't think Bruton is a bad player. I think he would be strong on special teams. He has the raw ability (in spades) to turn into a beast of a player. He has a good chance to prove me wrong (and a legendary Dawkins to teach him). He is a ball-hawking safety, which fits the new scheme for DBs in Denver.
NFL.com agree he has a lot of potential, but isn't there yet:
Bruton flashed as a play-maker in his first season as a starter in 2007, when he had 85 tackles, three interceptions and 4.5 tackles for loss. His production increased in some ways during his senior year (91 tackles, four interceptions, two forced fumbles), but his overall play did not result in Notre Dame's defensive improvement. A team captain, he has the size, speed and athleticism to potentially be a good starter and very good special teams player at the next level.
I just don't see the talent on display enough to justify the pick. I don't see that he's a "best". But I understand it. And (perhaps) the coaches saw something they can develop quicker than I give Burton credit for.
via static.nfl.com
Seth Olsen - Your New RG
Another pick I'm not fond of. Does he fill a need? Yes. Denver is thin at the the interior line on offense. Is this guy a great OG? Yes, I really think he is.
From NFL.com:
When you draft an Iowa lineman, you know he's technically sound and has been well-coached. Olsen has great strength and can step in and play guard right away. He's similar to Marshal Yanda, who was drafted by Baltimore a couple years ago. He's got strong hands.
So why don't I like the guy? I've read a lot since the pick. Olsen is a beast. He loves the rough and tumble of fighting at scrimmage. He's strong. He's a good pass blocker. He's a good kid. He knocks the crap out of people. But he doesn't do what I would like for him to do.
He doesn't fit the mold of a zone blocker (in my opinion). Yes, he's a little lighter and very athletic, but he doesn't block well at the second level. He has good lateral speed to pass block, but doesn't have the agility to move in closed space and take on a tackle without losing speed. In other words, he doesn't seem to have "quick feet".
I'm willing to be proven wrong. It is reasonable to assume that OL Coach Dennison had input on this pick, and he knows a heck of a lot more than me about OL measurables. TedBartlett905 is the Xs and Os expert on MHR's staff, and might disagree with me as well.
As a straight-up guard, I love this pick. I just question his zone-blocking skills in the running game. Perhaps Dennison can fix that. The kid IS a natural athlete.
via static.nfl.com
Kenny McKinley - Your New WR
I think this pick is a sleeper. That's right. This is my pick for the late-round player that becomes something special.
MHR's take:
This is a pick Broncos fans will learn to dig, just give it a little time. After seeing the WR board devastated in the third round, Denver waited like a crouching lion to pounce on McKinley. they just had to knock some other teams out of the way to do it, is all.
...and I agree.
From NFL.com:
The former Gamecock is a productive slot receiver with outstanding quickness. McKinley is a polished route-runner with good hands, and he'll give the Broncos another athletic receiver to add to their spread formations.
The Gamecocks struggled mightily without McKinley in the lineup for a three-game stretch in 2008, when he was clearly the team's most indispensable player. Called the best receiver he has ever coached, head coach Steve Spurrier had more than enough evidence to back up that statement.
McKinley's production stands out, especially when the Gamecocks' instability at quarterback is factored into his output. He set school career records for receptions and receiving yards, while also closing out his career second on the school's all-time touchdown catches list.
McKinley placed his name in the Southeastern Conference record books. His 207 receptions placed third in conference annals, becoming just the fifth SEC player to amass more than 200 catches in a career. He also became the 12th player in league history to record more than 2,700 receiving yards (2,781).
The best receiver that Steve Spurrier ever coached. You can get a lot of stats from the films, from the combine, and from the "experts". But there's nothing like the words of a head coach.
Does the kid have some problems? Sure; that's why he was in the fifth round. He isn't tough over the middle, had some hamstring problems, and his top-end speed isn't elite. But he separates well, has excellent hands, and (most importantly, even if other folks always ignore it) runs excellent routes.
He's a solid pick with a decent chance to surprise folks.
via static.nfl.com
Tom Brandstater - Your New QB
I like this pick a lot. This is the perfect QB to learn under McDaniels. He's smart (a rookie who is almost finished with his master's degree?) and looks solid ("According to reports, Brandstater was the most impressive quarterback throwing at the NFL Scouting Combine - SBN's mockingthedraft.com)
Ok, the best QB at the combine, if you will. But allow me to disagree strongly with a point made by mockingthedraft.com, which says "In the pocket, Brandstater is a statue. He lacks any mobility and struggles to avoid sacks".
That clearly flies in the face of this report from NFL.com:
He's got good speed and athleticism for his size......Despite his size, his feet are good enough to be effective on the bootleg and moving within the pocket.
I read that he has terrific speed despite his size at several sites, so that's where I'm putting my chips.
Another disagreement with MTD comes with this statement, "...but regressed some as a senior. He threw only 18 touchdowns, compared to 12 interceptions while completing less than 60 percent of his passes."
According to the official numbers found at (again) NFL.com:
Brandstater arrived back on campus for 2007 fall drills having already earned his degree. It was time for him to also earn some national recognition. He finished 23rd in the NCAA with a 140.49 passing efficiency rating and finished sixth in the WAC with an average of 213.23 yards per game. He amassed 2,654 yards on 211 of 337 passes (62.6 percent), connecting for 15 touchdowns against only five interceptions.
The three-time Academic All-WAC choice topped his previous season's numbers as a senior. He ranked fourth in the league in passing efficiency and total offense, as he hit on 221 of 371 tosses (59.6 percent), generating a career-high 2,664 passing yards to go with 18 touchdowns, as he collected 2,614 yards in total offense.
The MTD numbers are correct, but it was an improvement over the previous year. The context is also a poor one. Those are good numbers! (In fact, 4th in the League good!)
More on McDaniel's new project from NFL.com:
Brandstater is a big, strong quarterback. He's a good football player who was productive in college at Fresno State. He's got good speed and athleticism for his size and comes from a good college system. He gives Josh McDaniels a young signal-caller to develop over the years, like he did with Matt Cassel.Regards as the premier quarterback in the Western Athletic Conference, Brandstater possesses the range and arm strength that National Football League teams look for in a pro style quarterback. The unquestioned leader of the team put up impressive numbers since taking over the starting position as a sophomore, but has also excelled in the classroom, earning conference academic honors the last three seasons. His intelligence on the field is evident, but academically it is even more impressive, having graduated before his junior campaign and is finishing up work on his Master's degree.
Fresno State has boasted some great college quarterbacks in recent years and Brandstater has placed his name right next to the likes of Kevin Sweeney, Trent Dilfer, David Carr and Billy Volek in the school record books. He closed out his career ranking fifth in school annals in pass completions (584) and fourth in pass attempts (989), while ranking sixth all-time with 6,857 yards passing and 7,006 yards in total offense. His 47 touchdown passes placed him seventh in Bulldogs annals.
Brandstater showed intelligence and resolve at Fresno State after playing for four offensive coordinators in four years.
How a guy can put up solid numbers under 4 different coordinators is beyond me. He's obviously smart. He'll learn under McDaniels. He may very well be a surprise starter when someone gets hurt, or in 2 to 3 years.

Blake Schlueter - Your New C
MHR gets it right again.
This is a smart move, even we don't see immediate dividends.
He is a bargain basement fill in at center, with the agility and quicks to make you feel confident in his upside.
An excellent pick. Another diamond in the rough. This kid's only negatives don't apply to him in Denver, where he will zone block (not bulky or big enough). He's fast, he's agile, he's quick, he's ours.
NFL.com:
Schlueter is a football player, plain and simple. He's very mature and has unbelievable quickness and agility as an offensive lineman.
Schlueter opened some eyes and left scouts buzzing at the TCU Pro Day after a solid workout. He ran the 40-yard dash in 4.7 seconds, had a 35-inch vertical jump, a 9-foot, 3-inch long jump, a 4.28-second-short shuttle time and a 7.42-second three-cone drill.
And he fits the pattern. Yet another team captain in college. He's known for his maturity. He's a prototypical OL that no other gap block team wants, but Denver knows they can get him in the 7th and he'll rock. Wiegmann is likely in his last year at center for Denver. This is a home-run pick.
Overview
Every player filled a need, even if it wasn't a glaring need.
RB - We have great running backs already, but none of was able to start and finish the season with us without being on IR. Think about that.
DB - We have legendary DB already, all in their 30s.
OL - Our interior OL is thin and aging.
TE - Age and contracts coming due.
DE - Our current DEs are headed to OLB.
Slot WR - Brandon Stokley is the best slot receiver in the game, and old.
Every player matched the system.
Ball-hawking secondary, one-cut runner, blocking TE, zone-block OL (I might quibble with our OG pick-up).
EVERY SINGLE PLAYER IS A LEADER AND A QUALITY GUY OFF THE FIELD.
Note the number of team captains in this mix. All of these guys have notes at different sites that praise each player's maturity, academic prowess, and leadership. Our top "star" player (Moreno) is not a "me" player. In his interview, when asked how he would contribute and what he would bring to Denver's running game, he replied that he would be only one of several RBs who would serve his team with everything they've got.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you were hoping for certain players or certain positions, this clearly wasn't your draft.
If you wanted very sound players, leaders and playmakers, with every pick...
If you wanted players that match a system and not just a roster spot...
If you wanted hope for a long term dynasty instead of a few quick fixes...
This was your draft.
Yours,
Hoosierteacher
38 recs |
324 comments
|
Comments
Great stuff HT
Rec’d with enthusiasm!!!
"I am not one of those who think that coming in second or third is winning." -- Robert F. Kennedy
by Ted Bartlett on Apr 27, 2009 12:58 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
wow i wish i had a research paper or something due on the broncos draft
because i would have to look no further than this article
awesome work, (love that movie btw) and you best believe i am hitting that rec button as hard as i can!!
thanks HT.. simply put, your the effing man
"Have you ever heard of the emancipation proclamation?"
- "I don't listen to hip-hop"
by BroncoJoe311 on Apr 27, 2009 1:09 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
WOW!!!!!
Excellent write up! Not only was the breakdown of each player excellent but the overall theme was well thought out and expalined briliantly! My hat is tipped to you for your amazing analytical reasoning! Great job as always. You somehow continue to out-do yourself!
If we could have just screwed another head on his shoulders, he would have been the greatest QB who ever lived.
by c_style on Apr 27, 2009 1:23 PM MDT reply actions 1 recs
Good Article HT
I was thinking the same thing. Moreno brings a similar effect to the team that TD did for us. It appears that another SB is well within our reach in the near future. I’m hoping that your suggestion that Ayers will take up space means that Boss Bailey will be able to use his speed effectively to get to the opposing QBs. Now if he learns not to miss so many tackles, we will see some improvement there as well. Rec’d
My Dad told me about the 4 seasons:
Pre-season
Regular-season
Post-season
Off-season
by KaptainKirk on Apr 27, 2009 1:23 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Meaning of life
I thought the Meaning of Life was… nothing very special. Uh, try and be nice to people, avoid eating fat, read a good book every now and then, get some walking in, and try and live together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and nations.
Or at least that’s what Monty Python told me.
But seriously, great post. I’m still reading it! Have to take it to bed with me tonight and read the rest ;-)
by underdog on Apr 27, 2009 1:28 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
You've got it wrong...
The answer is 42.
;)
by hai17 on Apr 27, 2009 2:15 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
hai17 is correct.
42 is the answer. I couched the “meaning of life” in terms of the Broncos.
BTW, “Meaning of Life” is my favorite Python movie, even above “Holy Grail”. It was the first one I saw too.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 2:31 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
If your a fan of the Monty Python
if you have not heard of or seen the movie Yellowbeard, it’s worth a watch. Not too many people have even heard of it but in my opinion it is awesome.
by Stuman on Apr 27, 2009 2:35 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is that the one with
cheech and Chong in it?
by SlowWhiteGuy on Apr 27, 2009 2:41 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
yes
it has cheech and chong and seveal of the monty guys as well.
by Stuman on Apr 27, 2009 3:01 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah
I had never heard of it, a guy I work with remembered seeing it at the drive in back in the day and got it on tape when it came out because he liked it, he made me a DVD copy of the tape a long time ago and I absoluetly loved it. It actually came out on DVD last year some time I think it was, and I picked it up.
by Stuman on Apr 27, 2009 3:06 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
just got released on dvd last year
squabbling issues, like many films. i own it, and you can probably get it now on e-bay/amazon/somewhere, unless the first batch got eaten up. great movie, with the late graham chapman as yellowbeard, marty feldman, peter cook, eric idle, and the man-john cleese, as “blind pew”. also has my favorite female actress of all-time in madeline kahn, as yellowbeard’s “wife”. not as hilarious as the grail or the meaning, but a definite must for python fans. highly rec., and two thumbs up from me. sorry, i can talk python all day. get it now!
taste my blintzkrieg!
2009-year of the secondary?
by davecheffy on Apr 28, 2009 9:56 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
madeline kahn
is the best female actress ever. Absolutely love her, and yes you can get it on Amazon. Certainly worth the buy no doubt about it, if you are a Python fan.
by Stuman on Apr 28, 2009 10:11 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Stagger stagger crawl crawl.......
LMAO. That was a great flick
A proud prognostication of 10-6 in 2009!!!
by Broncotodd on Apr 28, 2009 6:18 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually it's a veiled reference
to Hitchhikers Guide
by SlowWhiteGuy on Apr 27, 2009 2:41 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I know.
But two points.
1) I was refering to his comment about Monty Python’s movie.
2) In the HGthG by Adams, the person who figured out the meaning of life was killed before being able to pass it on. I treat that as cannon, so I myelf never learned it either.
: )
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 2:46 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe I'm forgetting something...
But as I remember it, the answer was well know. The problem was, what was the question that was behind the answer to the meaning of life. Or has my memory gone completely?
by SlowWhiteGuy on Apr 27, 2009 2:49 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
no that's correct
everyone knows the answer is 42. But nobody knows the question.
"From the get-go, we targeted a certain type of player: tough, smart, competitive, versatile, a good person that loves football and wants to win." -Coach McDaniels
by Colorado_Kitten on Apr 27, 2009 4:04 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
How many licks does it take
to get to the center of a tootsie pop?
What is the number of the most impact player on the Broncos roster?
What is six times seven?
For the philosophers out there, which do you prefer, red or blue?
And for all of us, how many points (on average) will the Broncos beat other teams by in 2009?
-Harvey J. Neptune
"Practice doesn't make perfect. PERFECT practice makes perfect." - Vince Lombardi
by HarvJNep2n on Apr 27, 2009 5:09 PM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
they say "the meaning" at the end
it’s like “eat your veggies” and a bunch of other nonsense in a hurried answer. let me down on that one, as well as the ending to the grail, where you’re all revved up for the battle sequence, and they ran out of money, so the police come and end the film. anticlimatic endings for both, but 2 of the funniest films ever. the life of brian is pretty damn good, too
taste my blintzkrieg!
2009-year of the secondary?
by davecheffy on Apr 28, 2009 10:03 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Way to go!
I just recently discovered MHR during the McJayGate extravaganza, and I am so glad I found it! Just wanted to say great post! You guys have earned a bookmark and a loyal reader!
by 3RingsHeProbablyKnowsSomething on Apr 27, 2009 1:30 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Bless you...
…He (or she) who has the incredibly long name (which is no doubt shorter than what I ended up typing anyway).
We’re glad you’re here!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 2:32 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
i was also wondering about ayers
ive heard that he isnt a 2-gap player but i really dont have enough info to debate that he isnt so can you enlighten me as to why you think he is? thanks
"Have you ever heard of the emancipation proclamation?"
- "I don't listen to hip-hop"
by BroncoJoe311 on Apr 27, 2009 1:32 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I've read some similar criticisms as well.
WalterFootball’s knock on the Ayers’ pick is that he is more of a 4-3 end than a 3-4. I’d love to hear a response to that at some point (if anyone has one).
He seems like a beast to me, but I’m no expert.
by NedBronco on Apr 27, 2009 2:02 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's an outside lineman or LB, and played that in college.
But his strengths clearly weren’t in rushing from the edge. He did (however) do well in tackles in closed spaces, and showed the strength and balance to play as a DE in a 3-4. In our projected 3-4 system, the DE is not likely to be doing much rushing.
In other words, he wasn’t drafted to play as he was used in college. They used him as a LB, we want him for DE. They used him to rush, we won’t.
There’s no polite way to say this. He wasn’t used to his strengths in college. Despite that, he is widely considered a superior DE for a high draft pick. (Maylok made this point on Saturday, and I concur).
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 2:38 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ayers post-draft interview...
he said that Martindale worked him out and interviewed him, and wanted him to play rush lb for Denver. He went on to say that is the position he expected to play for us, but is willing to play where ever he is needed.?
Did anyone else catch this interview? I heard Mayock’s raves about his potential as a DE too, and thought that it contradicted what Martindale or the staff has planned for him.?
Taylor Mays in '10
by donbok1 on Apr 27, 2009 6:20 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was wrong, he says OLB not rush LB in the interview...
On what Broncos said about the position he’ll be playing
“The Broncos, they always talked to me about playing outside linebacker. But I also feel like I have the versatility to play any position. So, whichever (position) they (the Broncos) ask me to play, I’m going to play. Mostly, (Linebackers) Coach (Don) Martindale was the one who was scouting me, and he’s known me the longest, so I’m sure that’s the position I’m going to play. But when I get there, I can probably play any position. But that’s what I’ll be in, is outside linebacker.”
This still made me a little nervous, knowing what kind of logjam we will have at LB, but since versatility was the subplot to this year’s draft, maybe he will be able to play both OLB and DE.
Taylor Mays in '10
by donbok1 on Apr 27, 2009 6:55 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Since he's only 272
that seems light to play a 34 DE. So OLB makes sense to me, too, even if Martindale hadn’t made it clear.
"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
by spock on Apr 27, 2009 9:37 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
He could stop the run as a one gap 3 technique
like you wouldn’t believe. He was also stout lining up as a 1 tech off the center. Martindale himself hasn’t acutally weighed in, Ayers just said that Martindale is working with him (my guess is to show him the ropes of 3-4 OLB), but ALL of our Dlinemen and OLBs will be working with both Nunnelly and Martindale. They have to be ready to play both positions, and Martindale really liked Ayers so he sort of took the lead with him.
What I’m saying is, don’t be surprised if he lines up against the run as a 3-4DE.
There is no army so powerful as an idea whose time has come.
by Jeremy Bolander on Apr 27, 2009 10:44 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
he better...
My roots are in Denver and my branches in Nebraska.
by Blackshirt4Broncos on Apr 27, 2009 11:05 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
And the kid has the frame to get to 290 easily...
He has played some 5 technique too, and he will be slated to do some of this too.
He will bring many dimensions to our D!
I am excited!
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
All I want is 53 Rod Smiths. Is that asking too much????
by boydy2669 on Apr 28, 2009 7:11 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sounds like he plays bigger than he weighs. Quickness and leverage? Is it true he was one of the top two or three defenders, regardless of position, in the draft?
"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
by spock on Apr 28, 2009 8:01 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is what I am hearing
I had him rated a notch below my top guys because he only produced for one year and had trouble in his past. My thoughts were that the trouble had passed and that he was on an upswing talent wise but that there were no guarantees. Now he is a Bronco and I am more than happy to say there are guarantees!! :)
Seriously, he is all leverage. Tall guys are supposed to be at a disadvantage, but that rule doesn’t apply AT ALL to any player who figures out how to use his height to hsi advantage (talking dlinemen only here). His length gives him additional leverage which is killer, and he has shown hte discipline to bend and get low (it is an interesting adjustment he needs to make for when he is asked to stand up) and he has lower body explosive power to uncoil and get into the blocker. His technical know how allows him to engage on the lineman’s terms (i.e. he doesn’t have to be the fastest person off the line…though he should strive to be regardless)and then shed via countermove. Ona great play (and at the endof 2008 he had LOTS of great plays) he gets off the line quickly and sheds by engaging the lineman on his own terms! His technical savvy is what allows him to occupy all the slots on the line (almost) and hold up against interior blocking schemes. It keeps his legs clean as well, which means he is never out of a play, which is huge. Wesley woodyard and DJ are currently the best Dplayers denver has in keeping themselves clean around the line of scrimmage, adn we see waht they can do: they are always in a position to make a tackle instead of offbalance.
I could talk about Ayers all day. Him and Moreno.
However, I have nothing good to add about all our DBs. Overall I am ok with my choices for evaluation, but I have to say I screwed the pooch royally on the DBs. Basically, if I covered them, there is ZERO chance that Denver wanted them. I totally misguessed what kind of DBs McXanders was going to target. My error was reading too much into the firing of Bly. I looked at the opposite. Turns out they were looking for many of the same qualities, only cheaper I think…
There is no army so powerful as an idea whose time has come.
by Jeremy Bolander on Apr 28, 2009 11:44 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Moreno, THEN Ayers
shows how strictly McDaniels hewed to BPA (although maybe it should be called Best Value Available). I figured us getting Moreno would have you pumped. They must have had him ranked even higher than Ayers. I’m looking forward to watching him with your analysis in hand.
"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
by spock on Apr 29, 2009 6:23 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is just a bunch of random thoughts (read: venting)
I am not saying we didn’t draft good players, but we drafted a running back in the first round on the premise that McDaniels knows its hard to find a good RB. What about the 3 we signed in FA. If they we not good running backs why sign them, or why not check out 1 of the other 6 or 7 we have on the roster already. I understand the injury concerns, but if I recall correctly Hillis and Torains’ injuries were on freak plays. I would be too concerned.
If told you guys before the draft that with our first pick we were going to chose a ball hawking CB with average speed and below average height you would have laughed me out of the room. That’s what we did for next years draft. Besides didn’t just let a guy go that was exactly like that. I wasn’t a huge Bly fan, but no one can cover guys for as long as our secondary had to last year and succeed.
Bruton is just a head scratcher which brings me to my second point.
Why are we drafting for depth when we have several positions where the starters are questionable at best. I would like to more faith in our linebackers than I do, but I have seen them play. Now, if we had some D-linemen to eat up blockers and keep the LB corp free to make tackles we would have something. I think most of you would agree we don’t have that. If we had a D-line that could pressure the QB consistantly or LB could cover the flats properly instead of having to blitz consistantly relieving our secondary to focus on recievers. They also could cheat less against the run. And if we go to a 3-4 on the majority of snaps the D-line has to eat up blockers more than ever.
I could go on and on about what I didn’t like about the draft. This year was a weak draft, at some positions. There were good players to be had at positions of need this year. If we were going to trade a #1 pick I would have liked to see used in a more productive way instead of on a 2nd round CB.
I better stop now. Sorry guys I needed to vent.
by snofun23 on Apr 27, 2009 1:35 PM MDT reply actions 2 recs
RB's
We signed all of those RB’s to each perform a function. It is, or was, likely that Arrington would be the third down specialist to catch passes out of the backfield and to return punts. Jordan is probably just a contingency plan and Buckhalter is a change of pace and a professional to help tutor the young guys. Young is not likely to remain on the team much longer, unfortunately for him.
Finally when they signed all of these guys did they know that Moreno would fall into their laps? Call it an insurance policy.
I believe all of your other questions were answered by HT if you read closely enough. There weren’t any players available who could fill that role and also be the best player available.
We don't devote nearly enough scientific research to finding a cure for jerks. - Calvin
by solace on Apr 27, 2009 1:58 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hear you.
But you are talking about drafting by need, which wasn’t what the team was trying to do at all. I think Solace makes the same point above.
And you aren’t venting. You’re speaking your mind and doing it with class. We call that a “great comment” around these parts.
Thanks for the opinion!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 2:41 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have no problem with that...
In general, I like the approach of going with Best Available.
The problem that I see is that we didn’t go after our needs in FA and we are left trying to fill the biggest problem area, Defensive Front 7, with leftovers and Unsigned FA players. Assuming McDaniels knew that he was going to go after best available rather than need in the Draft…why didn’t he do something about the Defensive front earlier?
The other problem that I see is that we went out of our way to draft players that we do not need. We traded up to get a Blocking TE when we already have one of the best in the game. I know that this may pay off dividends in a few years, but I am really starting to wonder just who will be left to play defense this year.
Hopefully “The Plan” will come into view as the season progresses.
by miner00 on Apr 27, 2009 1:36 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I believe that we DID go FA for front 7 needs.
We brought in several defensive linemen and a LB for the front 7 (perhaps because most of our DEs are going to OLB). There is also still a post-draft FA period.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 2:43 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bull.
We might have brought in a few players and I believe there was one LB. Even McD has admitted that there are still big questions to be answered on the defensive front 7.
Back in the 90’s when the Broncos were winning SuperBowls, we had 2 full rotations of D-Linemen that could put pressure on the QB and stop the run. We also had one of the fastest, most aggressive LB core’s in the game.
After the initial FA period and the draft, we might have enough players to fill out a roster on the D-Line, but I think we will be hard pressed to put together a single quality line, let alone a decent rotation.
All I’m saying is that I don’t see any emphasis on what I believe to be the most important group of players on the field at any time, the defensive front.
by miner00 on Apr 27, 2009 3:49 PM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
Drafting D Lineman
Do you think that drafting D Lineman who most likely couldn’t beat out the D Lineman group that we currently have would have helped us in our draft in any way? This was a very weak draft for D Lineman, especially once Jackson and Raji were taken ahead of us at 12. What good does it do to waste draft picks on players that will most likely not even make the final roster cut? Win signed 2 D Lineman in FA (Fields & Reid), drafted Ayers (the best run stopping D Lineman in the draft), and then signed 2 more CFA D-Lineman. We’re trying to address the problem, we just are playing with the cards that were dealt to us.
If we could have just screwed another head on his shoulders, he would have been the greatest QB who ever lived.
by c_style on Apr 27, 2009 3:59 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
No
That is why I said I wasn’t unhappy with the draft, but FA and the draft together. Everyone knew that this draft was weak on DL, so it should have been addressed earlier.
Maybe I am wrong and the no name FA d-linemen will be incredible. Maybe Nolan is a genius and will get his stable of mediocre talent to perform like pro-bowlers. All I have to go on, is that every splash we have made in FA and the draft was for Running Backs and D-Backs.
What good does it do you to have 7 runningbacks and 4 TE and depth at Nickel, if the opposing team can rattle off 5 yards a rush and have 10 seconds to sit back and find an open reciever?
If you are thinking about taking a shot at Moreno, why go out and get 3 FA running backs in addition to the 7 we had on the roster last year. Couldn’t that money have gone towards a FA D-Lineman?
by miner00 on Apr 27, 2009 4:22 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Which FA D-Linemen do you wish we would have gotten?
Haynesworth and his $100M contract? We are trying to address the problem of stopping the run. We signed Andra Davis who is a solid run stopping ILB. We drafted the best runstopping D-Linman in the draft. We picked up a true NT and a DE in FA. We signed a true NT (the only true NT eligible in this years draft) in CFA, we signed another DE CFA. We are implementing a new scheme and bringing in players who can help us stop the run. I’m nopt saying we’re there yet, but hopefully with good coaching we will be much better at run stopping than last year. It’s not as if they are ignoring that obvious problem as you are suggesting.
If we could have just screwed another head on his shoulders, he would have been the greatest QB who ever lived.
by c_style on Apr 27, 2009 4:30 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Taking the Best AND Addressing Need
The article was very specific on taking a player that was the best at something and really disregarded cost for it, ie… trading up. In that sense I would’ve loved to see a trade with Jacksonville at #8 to get BJ Raji, who I believe was considered by many to be the best NT in the draft. I think this combined with the Ayers pick would have given the broncos the d-line they would need to make their secondary picks successful. This does mean forgoing Knowshon Moreno , who I do think will contribute quite a bit, but I’m not sure its that much more than what we would’ve gotten with who was already on the roster.
With Raji and Ayers, there are now two D-Line rookies who are solid on stopping the run and good at creating pressure on opposing quarterbacks. One of them is even good at handling the two gap . This also provides us with two viable NTs on the roster, instead of one, meaning that the O-Line of the opposing team doesn’t get a break when one player leaves the field.
Since the DBs that were drafted aren’t exactly run stoppers, solidifying the D-line also means that they can go do what they do best, cover routes, and intercept balls.
While I will enjoy Moreno ripping off run after run, I think the best move for the succes of the team would’ve been to solidify the D-Line. I would’ve enjoyed watching the Broncs stifle Moreno twice a year too.
by gOOn on Apr 27, 2009 5:56 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
You also have to consider where this guy fits on Denver’s list and the value of doing so. You pay a lot to go into the top 10 of the draft that is why so many teams wanted to get out of the top 10.
Don't jump off the cliff but if the guys next to you are loud and annoying try to push them off.
by Kfustud on Apr 27, 2009 6:12 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Raji brings no ore to the table than carlton Powell and would go round 3 next year. Why pay a guy like this 1st round money????
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
All I want is 53 Rod Smiths. Is that asking too much????
by boydy2669 on Apr 27, 2009 7:09 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
When Monroe
dropped to the Jags I think any chance of us moving up went out the window. The top three tackles were rated differently by different teams and Monroe just might have been the top tackle ont he Jags board.
"If you don't know where your going you might find yourself somplace else."
by BroncoJoe87 on Apr 28, 2009 10:03 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bringing in guys who can stop the run and cause turnovers!
My roots are in Denver and my branches in Nebraska.
by Blackshirt4Broncos on Apr 27, 2009 11:07 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
As to why we signed 3 FA RB's when we were targeting Moreno
We didn’t know that Moreno would still be on the board when we picked. It was an insurance policy. We also targeted players that have specific skill sets. JJ is a return man, Buckhalter is a change of pace back, and Jordan is a 3rd down power short yardage back. I don’t think we needed to sign all 3 but competition at any position is a good thing.
If we could have just screwed another head on his shoulders, he would have been the greatest QB who ever lived.
by c_style on Apr 27, 2009 4:34 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
There can only be 53 on the final roster...
and in FA and the draft, we seem to have double, triple and quadrupled up on “skill” positions and then hit the undrafted FA and late draft market for D-Line talent. Picking up FA’s is NOT the same as addressing a problem.
Forgive me for qustioning the wisdom of trading our #1 next year for a potential Nickel back, and not on the LB from USC who went in the next pick.
“We drafted the best runstopping D-Linman in the draft.” – Says Who? I’ve been looking around for that and I can’t find it anywhere. Started for 1 year in Tennessee and played pretty well, but I don’t see anyone saying he is the Best anything. Maybe he will be a great player, I don’t know. But I definitely don’t know that he was the “Best runstopper in the draft”. Hell, most teams, including NE were projecting him as an OLB in a 3-4 set. He can join Moss, Crowder, Dumerville, Williams and we can load up the whole field with run stopping OLB’s!
by miner00 on Apr 27, 2009 5:05 PM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
miner,
You make c’s point. The roster only has 53. So why trade down or stand pat? Why not trade up and lose picks (and save money at the same time by taking first round talent in the second)?
Says Who? I’ve been looking around for that and I can’t find it anywhere.
I’ll give you a great source. One of the few talking heads on TV that has gotten any respect (at least at MHR) is Maylok. He called Moreno and Ayers two of the top 4 players on his draft board. Ayers, he called the best defensive player in the draft. Want another source? The Broncos war room (and any other team that wanted Ayers to fall to them).
And I doubt he joins the players you’ve mentioned. His value as an OLB was not what we took him for. Again, his value as a DE in our own 3-4 makes him a higher value for us. Comparing value between teams doesn’t work in this instance. NE didn’t make an honest projection at any rate; they traded away from high end picks.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 5:22 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually picking up FA's is a way to address problems
Especially when this draft was weak on D Linemen. How is drafting D Linemen who are not better than who we currently have and who will probably not make the final 53 man roster addressing the problem? That is just wasting draft picks. In the situation we were in you do exactly what we did. You draft quality guys that you think can help your team and take a chance on FA’s instead of wasting draft picks.
There is wisdom in trading next years first round pick for a high 2nd round pick this year. That’s what next years 1st rounders are worth, this years 2nd rounders. Add in that the guy you draft you had graded as first round talent and that adds to the wisdom of that move. Then factor in the age of our starting CB’s and you’re drafting a guy that you wanted, that can help you for years to come. Bailey and Goodman won’t be Broncos forever. You’re right, he’s expected to be our nickel back his rookie year, playing behind 2 quality vets. How’s that a knock on him? He is also expected to be a quality #2 CB for years to come.
Finally, I find it funny how you wish we would have taken a LB instead of Smith and then you go on to list how many LB’s we have on our roster. Our LB group isn’t as poor as people seem to think. We have Davis & DJ in the middle. Woodyard seems to have improved from last year by reports our of our 1st minicamp and he had flashes of greatness last year. Like you mentioned we also have Dumerville, Moss, & Crowder. You left out Boss & Larsen as well. We have talent at LB and for the most part they are all young. We did add a lot of DB’s in the draft and while that was currently our strength of the D it was also the oldest area on the D. All 4 starters are over 30 and will need to be replaced in the near future. That is the primary function of the draft, to replace veterans who’s playing time is running short.
In summary, while most think that D Line was the most glaring need we do have young potential there. Powell has impressed the new staff and Peterson has too. Thomas is a stud and should succeed as a DE. We just added Ayers who was highly regarded by most NFL teams in the draft. These are all young players with potential. We also have Fields and Reid who are not that old either. Add some more CFA’s and it’s not hard to see the logic of our draft strategy especially considering it was a poor D Line class. I’m actually glad they didn’t draft more D Linemen who likely would struggle to make our roster and who were not as good as who we have just to appease the masses. Screw that kind of draft strategy. They studied and targeted the players who fit our system and who will benefit our team and then they went and got those players. They addressed areas of our roster that were aging and would need to be replaced in the next few years. Only time will tell how good their talent evaluations were but I can understand their strategy and even more I like it.
If we could have just screwed another head on his shoulders, he would have been the greatest QB who ever lived.
by c_style on Apr 28, 2009 12:28 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well...we will see
Tell you what, lets pick this up again in November and we will see if there might have been a little more we could have done on the D-Line.
Just becuase you have guys plugged into slots on the paper, doesn’t mean you have LB’s. Moss, Crowder, Dumerville are all 4-3 down linemen. We have no damn idea how they are going to perform as an OLB in a 3-4. Personally the idea of Tim Crowder covering LT in the flat is enough to give me night sweats. Thats no knock on Crowder…he is a down lineman and probably hasn’t dropped into pass coverage since Pop Warner.
Davis is a legit ILB, DJ is gonna have to prove it. He is a much better OLB in a 4-3 and I don’t know how he is gonna transfer into the 3-4 either. Boss is good when he isn’t hurt, and Larson showed flashes of talent last year. Woodyard has potential, could be spectacular in the 3-4.
I’m sorry, there are just too many “Could be”, “Flashes” and “Potential” players in the mix. They could come together and do great things…and they could be the worst Broncos D since the last time we tried the 3-4 a couple years ago with Bates.
We will know in November.
by miner00 on Apr 28, 2009 8:44 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Can you say smoke screen!!!!
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
All I want is 53 Rod Smiths. Is that asking too much????
by boydy2669 on Apr 27, 2009 7:09 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Miner....FA was far weaker....thats why Canty got a MONSTER contract....dont pay because of need....work your scheme around players!
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
All I want is 53 Rod Smiths. Is that asking too much????
by boydy2669 on Apr 27, 2009 7:07 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
We did need a blocking TE
Graham is on the downside of his career to say the least. His contract is also coming to an end soon. Drafting the best blocking TE in the draft will fill that void for the future. As for this year, we will need to have 2 blocking TE’s in on plays on the goalline. You can argue that we didn;t need to trade up to get him, but it’s hard to argue we didn’t have a need for that pick.
If we could have just screwed another head on his shoulders, he would have been the greatest QB who ever lived.
by c_style on Apr 27, 2009 3:14 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Argh! Stupid itchy trigger finger!
What I meant to say was that while I’m obviously no NFL-caliber talent evaluator, I don’t know of an offensive position (or frankly non-kicking game position) that has a lower value than TE. Add to that the fact that Quinn is apparently not an offensive threat, and I would argue his value is even lower. Is he really that much better than Chad Mustard?! Don’t worry, I’m just kidding (I think), but you see my point. From my perspective, that pick was not a great way to end Day 1.
The Quinn pick aside, really the only true problem or frustration I had with the draft (given who was available when we picked) was the trading of future draft picks. I would have liked to see some ILB or DE players added but am willing to defer to McD & Co; however, from what I’ve seen over the years, teams that trade future picks usually come to regret it, both in terms of the quality and depth of their rosters. I truly hope this is a one year thing for us, and not part of a long-term mindset.
by Elway's Ghost on Apr 27, 2009 4:13 PM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
I understand what you're saying
I’m not thrilled with trading away so many future draft picks either. I think, or rather hope, it’s just a 1 year strategy to try to catch up talent wise this year. I think that McD will draft differently in the years to come.
While TE may not be that high of value for an offensive pick. My point is that McD was trying to improve in our horrendous red-zone play from last year. With Moreno in the back field (or even Hillis) combined with a 2 TE set that consists of 2 very good blocking TE’s, we should be able to get the 6 much more often than settling for the 3.
If we could have just screwed another head on his shoulders, he would have been the greatest QB who ever lived.
by c_style on Apr 27, 2009 4:19 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
If I may
I don’t know of an offensive position (or frankly non-kicking game position) that has a lower value than TE.
It only has a lower value if it’s badly used. I realize that you only said that you don’t know, but in this era of 2TE sets, I have to ask you – if it’s of such limited value, why is it so commonly used at critical times in games and drives?
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Apr 27, 2009 4:43 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not to pick a fight with a MGH Titan, but
I didn’t say TEs were not useful. I said their positional value is below that of any other position, at least on offense.
QB is obviously the most important because he touches the ball on every play, makes all the decisions, etc. RBs are pretty useful too but their shelf life is pretty small and with the proliferation of the 2 back rotation, their value takes another hit. Still, they get the ball a lot and good ones cause a defense a lot of problems. WRs stretch the defense and create more room for the QB and RBs to operate. They can be game changers. Last, but certainly not least, without the O-line, you’re QB and RBs get killed, you can’t move the ball, and you constantly live in "Three-And Out Land". A good OL can mask a lot of team problems.
Having a good TE is a luxury, esp. one that is an offensive threat. We all remember the match-up problems #84 posed: a LB couldn’t run with him and a safety couldn’t hang strength-wise. But when compared with the other positions, how much real value does a runblocking TE have? I would argue it falls SIGNIFICANTLY below every other offensive position.
Do you have another candidate for “lowest positional value”?
by Elway's Ghost on Apr 27, 2009 5:07 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree with your premise.
In the Patriots philosophy (called The Ameoba) no player is above the team. If you think in terms of QB = important / TE = less important then you can’t have a “best available” draft and you can’t build an “every position a crucial position” philosphy.
You can disagree with the philosophy, and that’s fair. But you can’t judge the philosophy by the merits of a philosphy with a totaly different context. It doesn’t mesh together, nor is it supposed to.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 5:27 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
With all due respect, I think you're confusing the issue.
You think the Patriots don’t value one position over another? Why does Tom Brady make about 10 times what Ben Watson makes (and Ben Watson is at least a threat in the passing game)? I suggest that the reason is as much because Brady plays QB, as it is that he’s a Pro Bowler and Watson is not.
“No player is above the team” is fundamentally different than “no position is more important than any other position”. Just like in chess, with football (as you know) some pieces have inherently more value than others and I doubt very much that you could convince Bill Belichick (or any other NFL coach) to state otherwise.
What I’m saying is that I think trading up to draft a position that is probably the least important position on the field was surprising, and to me, somewhat troubling. Especially when all available information points to the probability that the player drafted will continue to be limited as an offensive weapon.
by Elway's Ghost on Apr 27, 2009 7:49 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Strong points. Touche! But En Guard!
And points that lead to a lot of fun for us both!
1) In addition to coaching football, I played and coached a lot of chess. You are right, pieces have value. But only at a base level of analysis. queen-9, rook-5, bishop-3, knight-3, pawn-1, king-infinite. But you would agree that a bishop has more value than a knight in an open position, and a knight has more value in a closed position (even if we give both 3 points). You would also agree that a pawn increases in value as it advances, since opposing pieces (of higher value) have to divert to prevent the lowly pawn from queening. There are dozens, if not hundreds of more examples.
2) Yes, Brady is paid more. But not because the team wants to. There is a market value that is created because of proportionate values around the League. For example, we both likely agree that Cutler was paid based on his initial contract, not his actual worth. And take a look at the roster (before Cutler left) and you’ll see that he was NOT the highest paid player on the team, despite being a QB.
I hear your points, and understand them. I don’t even really disagree. I’m just using a dfferent perspective, so it makes my conclusions different from yours.
: )
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 8:57 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I appreciate you comments
And your insight. Thanks for taking the time.
I like to play chess, but I’m man enough to admit you’d probably wipe the board with me! :)
by Elway's Ghost on Apr 27, 2009 9:29 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
In all fairness...
…I’d guess I probably would. But that doesn’t make me right. Not by a long shot.
It’s terrific to come to a place where folks can disagree with equals, instead of being shouted down (like in the infamous message boards at DP). I have more fun disagreeing with you on this thread then agreeing with anybody on any other site. And that’s why I stay put.
Thanks for being here. You’re a class act!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 9:43 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think I could take you...
I spent years getting demolished by my step dad…but that was in my youth. He hasn’t beaten me two times in a row in…about 7 years.
Verbose in style, dispersion of thought, procrastination in life.
by Tim Lynch on Apr 27, 2009 10:51 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe you could.
After all, I spent years getting demolished by my first coach, and never even got a drawn game!
Here’s a little blurb about him.
I was never a strong player at all (not even close to a master rating). I enjoyed travelling and eating as much as I enjoyed getting mopped up by the real contenders (losing a good game IS a lot of fun if you have a passion for the game itself). I did (however) manage to get the middle school chess team I coached to the internationals every year. Go figure; I’ve always been a better coach than a player in everything I do.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 28, 2009 7:50 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't like to lose, probably because my old man didn't win with class. lol
Though a friendly game is just that…if you beat me fairly quickly I’d probably demand a rematch. Just sayin…. lol
Verbose in style, dispersion of thought, procrastination in life.
by Tim Lynch on Apr 28, 2009 8:36 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Then I should beat you quickly.
That way we can play several games.
: )
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 28, 2009 8:38 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
BTW
I beat my daughter at Chutes and Ladders a couple of weeks ago. I was a sore winner – celebrating and all.
She’s in first grade (we waited a LONG time). She says, “I can’t wait to graduate from high school and get out of here!”
LOL
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 28, 2009 8:39 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, my daughter hates it when I win as well.
If anything…my actions as a winner make her even more competitive. I like competitive people.
Verbose in style, dispersion of thought, procrastination in life.
by Tim Lynch on Apr 28, 2009 11:15 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, heck, disagree with me!
I think that HT’s right, and all, but it would be such a boring old world…;-)
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Apr 27, 2009 5:48 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Always nice to have The Bear on your side.
It keeps one from being eaten. (Here, have another salmon. Just take my arm out of your mouth. That’s it. NICE bear).
: )
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 6:12 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
ummm...salmon....
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Apr 27, 2009 7:03 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Disagree with him...I do it all the time...
The point here is if you take Jim Kleinsasser away from the Vikings entirely, does the offense really miss a beat? After all Kleinsasser is a great blocking TE and is valuable in certain sets but the old timers used to get blocking TE’s later in the draft without trading away talent to get it. It does appear high to trade up for Quinn but then that’s prompts you to dig deeper.
Here is what Eagles may have been thinking…
If the Eagles opt to use the No. 21 pick on help at another position, they could look to North Carolina tight end Richard Quinn. Kiper judged Quinn to be a player the Eagles could take a chance on being available when they pick in the second (53rd overall) or third (85th overall) rounds.
The 6-4, 264-pound Quinn caught only 12 passes during his UNC career, but his stock rose when he ran a 4.75 40-yard dash when pro scouts were on campus to assess the Tar Heels’ draft prospects.
’’He’s a guy you get to see blocking all the time on film, but not catching a ton,‘’ Heckert said. ’’He’s one of the few guys who’s more of a blocker, but he is a receiver. He’s more of a true tight end than some of the other guys.’’
So obviously McDaniels saw the potential as well and felt that he wouldn’t be there and traded up to get who he targeted. I think we are shocked with all the moves but in the end McDaniels got everyone he wanted.
Moreno in 2009! - Check
Mays in 2010!
by Steve O' on Apr 27, 2009 9:41 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fantastic find
I read that too but couldn’t remember where….
There is no army so powerful as an idea whose time has come.
by Jeremy Bolander on Apr 27, 2009 10:54 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Impressive post
A much appreciated read with lots to think about (and lots of time between not and the season to do the thinking).
I’d also be really interested in your opinion(s) on our trading of draft picks in next year’s draft. I believe we are left with 5 next year, although, as we know, clearly that can change at any time.
by Elway's Ghost on Apr 27, 2009 1:37 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Like most people...
…I hate trading future picks. I would have liked to have picked up future picks. However, several variables enter here.
First, the Patriots trade for future picks because their team is already stacked. We aren’t. Still, we managed to get 10 picks this year to jumpstart a team that has been average or worse for some years. When the team starts having success (give it a year or two), I expect we will follow the Patriots strategy of stockpiling future picks.
Second, we have a rough schedule this year and a first year coach. He has precious little time to play for the future. He brought in major players (Dawkins primarily, and to a lesser extent players like Hill, Goodman, Fields, Arrington, Davis, and Buckhalter) to stem the bleeding right away, and took solid players in the draft that aren’t likely to be back-ups for more than a year (if that).
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 2:53 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the reply HT
I hope you’re right on the limited nature of McD. & Co’s use of the “trade future draft picks” strategy; however, I fear we will really miss those picks come the end of the 2009 season.
Again, thanks for the response.
by Elway's Ghost on Apr 27, 2009 4:17 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
We will miss those picks. No doubt about it.
We should also enjoy our team a little more than we have. As Ted points out in his excellent post, we are already improved at virtually every position.
We will also likey forget that the players we hope for next year (that we won’t get) are offset by the players we DID get this year.
Patriots fans aren’t griping about the limited picks used this year, because their team is already good. That’s what we are aiming for,
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 4:22 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Let us not forget
Belichek inherited an solid base of players from previous regime. McD does not have that luxury. The best player concept works well when you have a solid basis. I don’t necessarily argue the picks on average are good players, but we have glaring needs.
When people say what defensive lineman – how about Orakpo, Hood, Cushing or Matthews at LB in the first round. Yes, maybe not the best player – but solid players that upgrade a need, and certainly should make the team. When you have a solid basis, then draft best player.
by BroncoBilly on Apr 27, 2009 5:19 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Broncos draft board didn't rate them highly.
NE drafts best player in good years and in bad. Because of this, they have precious few bad years. They take a diametricaly different approach than what I think you are proposing.
They build a solid basis, then keep building it.
Much like a mutual fund – buy low, AND buy high, but buy, buy, buy.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 5:31 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I haven't personally checked
but McD said in his press conference the we have a full set of picks next year, round 1-7. Has anyone confirmed this?
Have a good time all the time...that's my motto. - Viv Savage
by TD4HOF on Apr 27, 2009 6:25 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bruton is the best special teamer in the draft....
As McD spoke about glowingly at the presser.
So there’s your “best”.
Excellent, excellent write-up. REALLY appreciate it!
by jaredstill on Apr 27, 2009 1:41 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Thank you Jared.
Excellent catch!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 2:54 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
you guys will see … Bruton is a good pick for ST
by hallandnash on Apr 28, 2009 8:22 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Bruton
“He’s one of the finest special teams players in the draft, period. He was a great gunner for the punt team, getting down there and getting to the returner before the ball was caught, many times forcing a lot of fair catches. He’s got great speed. I think he’s the fastest safety in the draft. He could really impact us on three or four teams; punt, punt return, kickoff, kickoff return. I think he’s blocked a kick or two in his career, or certainly has the capability to do that. He’s got great range in the deep part of the field as a safety also.”
I have no idea whether it’s true or not, but McDaniels thinks that Bruton is a “Best”; he thinks he’s the best special team player.
I don’t absolutely love the pick, I don’t know anything about the guy really, but I am absolutely thrilled that we seem to have stopped ignoring 1/3 of the team.
by scannon on Apr 27, 2009 1:42 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
See, this is what I love about the Bruton pick.
One of my least favorite tendencies of Shanahan’s coaching was that he tended to ignore special teams. Not only did he not draft for it, he also simply played our backup linebackers, cornerbacks (and Champ), and receivers there and hoped for the best, with the result that I noticed a ton of ST plays over the year that were single-handedly saved from being a TD or huge yardage by Champ himself.
After reading up on Bruton, all signs point to him being the best ST gunner in the draft, and an overall demon on ST. So in addition to drafting him as another insurance to a position of need (let’s face it, Dawkins and Hill won’t be around very long), he also stands to make an immediate impact on a portion of the team that has been ignored for far too long.
The more I look at this draft, the more I like it.
by Shoemaker on Apr 27, 2009 1:49 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like Shanahan....
…I tend to ignore STs. That’s a fault.
I still don’t like the pick, and don’t see him as a future starter. If he plays the back-up role, he only (knock on wood) may need to shine for a game or so.
But I appreciate and conceed to the point folks are making about him as a STs ace. Yes, he figures in there. I didn’t explore that angle, and it is to your credit (and apparently McDaniels) that he thought it worth drafting for. If the pick was designed to bolster the STs, there is certainly an argument to be made.
My context is geared towards offense and defense, and I admit that STs always (and still) confounds me.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 2:59 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
remember in FA we brought in some special teams aces as well....especially Darrell Reid!
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
All I want is 53 Rod Smiths. Is that asking too much????
by boydy2669 on Apr 27, 2009 7:38 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
See my reply to Jared above.
Good catch, and thank you!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 2:54 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
+100
BEST ST player in the draft. Denver’s ST’s were even more awfull than the D. Great pick!!!
"...the liberty of the Press is called the Palladium of Freedom, which means, in these days, the liberty of being deceived, swindeled, and humbugged by the Press and paying hugely for the deception."
-Mark Twain, 1870
by BornOrange on Apr 27, 2009 3:25 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
My bro at Notre Dame on Bruton
my opinion (unsolicited of course), bruton’s a steal in the 4th. he’s fast (reportedly one of the fastest on the team, which is remarkable), aggressive and athletic and could develop quite nicely. meanwhile, grimes is a decent receiver. never really developed into a star at ND but has good basics.
"They need a hero to tell them that the impossible can become possible..... WHEN... YOU'RE... AWESOMMMME!" -- Rhino the Hamster
by broncosmontana on Apr 27, 2009 6:27 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm open to being wrong.
Your bro is right there, so he has a good look. It sounds like some folks here are seeing something I may have overlooked. I’ll be watching him closely, and of course, I’ll be pulling for him too.
All the best to you and your brother!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 6:32 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know
I’m just relaying what he said as a regular observer, but I’m tending to agree with you, personally. But with the right coaching, he might prove to be a find.
"They need a hero to tell them that the impossible can become possible..... WHEN... YOU'RE... AWESOMMMME!" -- Rhino the Hamster
by broncosmontana on Apr 27, 2009 6:42 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’ve seen Bruton and Grimes play every game ..
Bruton will star on ST .. the man can tackle, flat out tackle.
Grimes is a project. Like most ND WR’s not pitching for the Cubs, They are underused by Weiss. But Grimes has speed, but is a little small — he is shifty and could potentially fill a Welker type role.
by hallandnash on Apr 28, 2009 8:24 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
whose your daddy!?! - HoosierTeacher!
As an honorary professor at MHR University, I approve this message! Great post HT!!
Moreno in 2009! - Check
Mays in 2010!
by Steve O' on Apr 27, 2009 1:43 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
or rather...
….hoosierdaddy!
Sorry. I’ll stick to writing sports and leave the humor to the experts.
By the way, my list of faculty doesn’t have an “honorary” title in front of your department chairmanship. You are too modest professor.
And thank you.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 3:02 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nice work HT.
Why aren’t you working for the Broncos? Just curious…
"It means nothing to throw for 4500 yards, 25 touchdowns, and you dont win" -Brandon Marshall
by Joe Medina on Apr 27, 2009 1:44 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Ask them!
They canned the last blogger they had (and he was a good one), and I’m wise enough to see the infinite gulf between HS defensive coordinator and pro coaching (even waterboy!)
But if they found it in their hearts to bring me in somewhere I wouldn’t damage the team, I’d have a hard time saying no.
Thanks so much Cali.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 3:04 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Excellent post, HT
I hope that these guys turn out to be half as good as they sound. Looking very forward to training camp and the preseason games to see out new team in action.
We don't devote nearly enough scientific research to finding a cure for jerks. - Calvin
by solace on Apr 27, 2009 1:50 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
If only half of them work out for us...
…it would be a terrific draft (in my opinion).
Thanks for the kind words. I can’t wait to find out how camp goes!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 3:06 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Awsome again HT!
I was inspired to change my sig after reading this post. I think Ozzie Newsome said it. It’s one of my favorite quotes.
All you get from drafting the "best player available" is a team full of good football players.
by orangeblood on Apr 27, 2009 1:53 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
LOL
I should have used it! I spent all night writing what I could have written in one sentence.
I’ve been bested!
Thanks OB!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 3:08 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fairbanks-Bullough?
HT several times you’ve mentioned, in this post and others, that you see us going to a Fairbanks. Yet, to me, it seems that we are more likely to go to a Phillips: Nolan seems to be a Phillips guy (though he also knows Fairbanks from working under Collier) and Nunnely is a Phillips guy.
What is it that leads you to think we’re going to a Fairbanks?
Oh and awesome post. Too much to digest in one sitting!
by SlowWhiteGuy on Apr 27, 2009 2:07 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Good point.
There are good arguments both ways, and we could discuss this for days and have a great comment thread.
McD is a F-B system guy; that goes without saying. You are right that Nolan goes both ways (in the platonic sense of the phrase), but I see him going F-B, in particular with the Andra Davis move (and even the Ayers move). Slow but big. Moving DTs to DE (if that indeed happens) would be another clue. Also, Nolan uses a Ted LB to “lead block” the other ILB to the QB in blitzing schemes. Not something done with a Phillips.
But you make strong points too, and it could go either way. Nunnely is a major wrench in my construct, and (admittedly) my projection is speculative based on what little evidence we have so far. Camp will give us an answer.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 3:16 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I see your reasoning
and I saw it that way at first too. In fact I suspect that McD may have wanted to go that direction at first. But the more I try to put the pieces of the puzzle together the more it looks to me like we are trying to build a D modelled after the Ravens of last year. I see the 1-gap DTs, the big LB/DE types for the outside, a run stuffer paired with a fast LB for the inside and the DB to complement it all. I could be wrong, but it looks to me like something more akin to the original 5-2 (only with faster more athletic DEs) than the traditional 3-4.
Your thoughts?
by SlowWhiteGuy on Apr 27, 2009 3:28 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
very thoughtful and subtantial
I have a feeling that Moreno is going to make the doomsdayer’s forget about our dearly departed quarterback very quickly. Josh Mcdainel’s reminds me a mad scientist. Kind of small with a goofy kind of look. But I just suspect that he is putting together a formula and that there is a real method to his madness as this article suggests. I for one am not going to second guess his expertise as popular as it might be in some circles to do so. IMHO the Denver Broncos are a substantially better team than they were Jan.1. I am looking forward to seeing this formula take effect.
by gpe999 on Apr 27, 2009 2:07 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
We as fans are allowed to second guess decisions by the coach.
I spent all of last year “hating” on the defensive coordinator, who had no discernable system. I also “hated” on the offensive coordinator, who was doing this “spread – no run” thing. Question away!
After questioning the staff for the first two picks (great picks, just not my cup of tea), I figured it out moments after the third pick. I then went back and re-evaluated my own thinking. The fourth pick sealed it. I had been wrong, and the coach (and GM) were right. In my opinion.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 3:21 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
"mad scientist"
coach McTesla?
by Royal With Cheese on Apr 27, 2009 4:12 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm giving you extra credit points...
…for a very clever “The Prestige” reference.
Very well played!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 4:16 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great post, HT! Rec'd
Drafting for need no matter the quality only to cut the guy later because he couldn’t make the team is a waste of a pick. BPA who fits a system means more picks will actually make the roster and have a real impact.
"From the get-go, we targeted a certain type of player: tough, smart, competitive, versatile, a good person that loves football and wants to win." -Coach McDaniels
by Colorado_Kitten on Apr 27, 2009 2:10 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I buy that.
I also buy your sig.
And I STILL want to meet your avatar.
Thanks!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 3:22 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
This was great.
Deeply appreciate the effort. The Broncos mean a lot to me and I was very excited about this draft. I’ve struggled making sense of it and this really helped. (I definitely followed the pattern you described above when the picks weren’t what I expected.)
You make a huge contribution to this site.
by NedBronco on Apr 27, 2009 2:14 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
As do you.
If I make a contribution to the site, it’s only because it’s a family worth being a part of. I get much more out of the site than I put into it, and (like all of us) do it for the friendship without a penny earned.
Thanks for the kind words.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 3:25 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Reading Jason Cole's
AFC draft grades, and then the pieces here on MHR, well, it just makes me appreciate the insight here because between Cole on Yahoo! and the ESPN guys, I sort of wanted to punch someone.
He gives the Jets an “A-” because they got Mark Sanchez — which, fine, he’s a good player, could be a great QB (or might not be). And then they had two other draft picks. Neither of which impressed me that much. The Broncos get a “D”. Again, he brings up the DL concerns, which I know a lot of people here have as well, but I feel like there’s been a lot of good reasoning as to why they only took one (and then signed more in college free agency). Then he doesn’t really seem to understand much about the other players the Broncos took. In short, Cole gets a D from me.
by underdog on Apr 27, 2009 2:15 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't have a problem with draft grades that differ.
Note that I avoid giving a grade. My issue is how well a grade is explained. As a teacher, we (should) give grades based on how well a student makes his case (such as in a paper), and NOT based on whether we agree or not.
The point that many of my detractors miss is that I didn’t want ANY of these players. What I buy into (fully) is the strategy behind the Denver draft, and the execution. These aren’t players I wanted (in a “needs” context). What they are (however, and more importantly) is a buch of good, solid players that will build the team reagardless of need.
It’s a difficult paradigm shift for people to think in those terms. Wrong player selected, but right player selected.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 3:40 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have to disagree with this analysis on many fronts
Comparing our draft to NE draft philosphy is not even close, look at NE, they pulled out of the 1st round because they knew those lottery tickets were worthless, they know that it is not some simple probablistic game of chance, that next year’s draft is far superior than this years, and that they won’t overpay or overextend for a player, they don’t fall in love with a few players, much to what McDaniels did, and they see the true value in similar players, knowing that if player A goes ahead it is not that big of an issue of value getting player B or C, they don’t overpay.
So lets look at the pick by pick look, lets start with Moreno, is he a good back, definately, is he the best back in the draft, debatable, but lets for a moment suggest that he is, (I still find the LT comparison very far fetched, but lets role with it), history has shown that there are many backs that can work in a zone system, you have now guarenteed a serious amount of cash to a player who you may be able to get as good if not better in latter rounds in the draft (look at the production of McFadden versus Slaton if you want to compare value of RB through the draft), the point is that RB is a position that can be easily filled with later value picks and get as good if not better production. This pick seemed to be fueled by the preconceived notion that SD would take Moreno versus what they actually would of done (doubtful they would of tied up millions in a bench player for two to three years when they can get a guy similar to Turner later in the draft).
On to Ayers, is he a good defensive player, maybe, and that is a big maybe, he is a guy who started one year and will now be required to learn a new position and system, expectations for immediate impact may be somewhat inflated. Was he the best player on the board, maybe, however, he has about the highest boom/bust potential I see, I would give this a wait and see, except that as McDaniels said, he wants 1st round guys competing for starting positions. So Ayers is going to have to be able to absorb a far more complicated defense and position than he has ever played in a short amount of time to provide for any rookie impact. If you noticed, SD took a guy more accustomed to the position and should be able to adjust and provide immediate impact faster, hence giving them a bigger bang for the dollar.
Which brings me to A. Smith. Has the guy had a spectacular college career, yes. Will that translate to the pros, doubtul, the two guys you mentioned above (Jim Leonhard of Wisconsin (21, 2001-04) and Mitch Meeuwsen of Oregon State (20, 2001-04) neither is a pro-bowl player and I don’t even know if they are still in the league. The point being that as many a wise coach has said, two things you can’t coach are size and speed, and sadly A. Smith lacks size (5’ 9") or blazing speed (4.56/40), his game will not translate on the next level to anything other than a 2nd tier CB, if that. He may be a good nickle back, but is that worth a 1st round pick, is that worth someone like Taylor Mays, Brandon Spikes, or the other difference makers that will be available next year? I really think not. You trade away a potential pro-bowler for a 2nd tier CB, doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.
I will skip MacBeth since I think he may be worth a shot, but probably a little high. And lets look at Quinn. I hate to say this, but this pick makes no logical sense, trust me, he would of been there in the 3rd round. I don’t even think there was a TE taken in the third round (stand corrected in Coffman was taken at the end of the round), much less a blocking TE. Blocking TE’s are fairly easy to find, hell, if you want a blocking TE, Chad Mustard is always around and is a pretty cheap blocking TE. Expecting this guy to be the next Graham is crazy, Graham was a damn good TE coming out of CU in that he was adept at blocking and catching and only needed to refine his game. This pick was completely overvalued in that we gave up an extra player for someone that would of easily been there in the 3rd round. Trust me, blocking TE’s are not a high priority to many clubs.
I am not going to give the hatchet to the other picks since I don’t think anything past the 3rd round is just a roll of the dice anyways. What I am trying to point out is that the fault of the McDaniels stragagy was that he fell in love with these players, he had a narrow board and wasn’t allowing the Broncos to look at the picture in a broader spectrum and allow for players to come to them and place proper value on the picks. Trust me, the new BMX bike may look cool this Christmas, but would you take that knowing that if you had saved that money you could get a new motocross bike next Christmas, that is what this draft stragy amounts to, yes the BMX bike is fun to peddle on the track, but the motocross bike will allow you to actually compete in the race.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the one with the gun, A-hole" - Ash from Army of Darkness
by Broncoman on Apr 27, 2009 2:16 PM MDT reply actions 2 recs
appreciated this
thoughtful, lengthy rebuttal :-)
I don’t agree with all of it but I appreciated it.
Btw, while we’d both agree that no one really knows everything or will be able to properly evaluate for another couple of years, I particularly disagree with you about A Smith. I’ve been following him for awhile in college, he is a DB I’ve been watching, was my second favorite in the draft after Jenkins, and I’m stoked we have him. Again, he could still be a bust, who knows. But as Hoosier points out, the lack of size is sometimes overrated when a player has great ability otherwise. (I’ve also seen DBs who were very tall but had zero instincts, so, their height was negated). He’s a smart, talented player. Darrent Williams was short, too, as Hoosier points out. I think the Raiders love speed. More often than not that ends up not mattering.
Anyway — thanks!
by underdog on Apr 27, 2009 2:35 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
As much as I appreciate D. Williams
He had more speed than Smith and he still struggled mightly, did he bring fire and spirit yes, but at the end of the day, that only gets you so far when the guy you line up against can out jump you for a ball.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the one with the gun, A-hole" - Ash from Army of Darkness
by Broncoman on Apr 27, 2009 2:37 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
From "Styg's Matrix"....
“Remember, there is no ball”.
: )
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 3:52 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
The difference
is that the Pats have been competing in the race for years now with a beautiful and well oiled machine -they can afford to fix the chips in the windsheild as they come through the draft and FA, and just flesh out their depth otherwise. Whereas we haven’t even been in the race the last few years.
"From the get-go, we targeted a certain type of player: tough, smart, competitive, versatile, a good person that loves football and wants to win." -Coach McDaniels
by Colorado_Kitten on Apr 27, 2009 2:35 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
But here's the difference
They stay in the race by not getting worried about players this year, they look at upcoming drafts and position themsleves well when there is more talent, why do you think they had extar 1st rounders last year, it was because the 07 draft had junk and the 08 draft had a bunch of talent.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the one with the gun, A-hole" - Ash from Army of Darkness
by Broncoman on Apr 27, 2009 2:40 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
hmm
I think the issue here is that we are not even in the race.
McDaniels needed the tools to buy-in before and guarantee he might be around for the finish.
If he kept trading and didn’t address needs this season then everyone would be calling for his head. You can’t tell your team you are going to skip competing this year and focus on ones down the line.
by Todd Jewell on Apr 27, 2009 3:03 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's the thing that seems to get lost
What players did we get this year that are going to have an immediate impact? Moreno you could argue, but Ayers I would say is a 50/50 if he sees more than 30 percent of the defensive snaps, Smith will be a nickle back at best, and the safeties will be ST only along with the TE, so he didn’t get that much better this year. But next year you could have three or four legit starting caliber players in that draft with much higher cellings, that is how you build for the future and long term.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the one with the gun, A-hole" - Ash from Army of Darkness
by Broncoman on Apr 27, 2009 3:29 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll take that one.
Moreno – absolutely.
Ayers – I believe he will.
Smith – Absolutely, at nickle. (But both CBs ahead of him are in their 30s)
The Safeties – No, but that is only because we brought in two very talented safeties in FA (but both of whom are in their 30s).
Quinn – Absolutely (at least in short yardage and running downs).
That covers the first 3 rounds, from which teams hope for starters.
You are also critical that we didn’t build for the furture or the long term. I have 10 rookie names that would disagree. The vast majority of teams don’t have that many rookies on the roster. Denver has wrecked the team with FA signings over the last few years. But last year we took the same path (best available) and minimized FA impact. Most of us would agree that last year’s draft was one of the best ever (so far).
I would add that most fans hated that draft when it was happening.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 4:00 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
forgetting..
I think a lot of people are completely overlooking the special teams aspect that the safeties [and the cb — 5 kicks blocked in college?? from 5’9 guy??] bring to the team. McD has stated many times that ST is a huge area of concern and he drafted three guys that will have some impact on D, but will have definite immediate impact on ST.
You can’t just look at things as offense / defense — special teams HAS to be part of it. Look at chicago with hester — they were in or won games just because of special teams alone.
by Todd Jewell on Apr 27, 2009 4:15 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
You are right Todd.
As I mention in an earlier comment, I completely forgot to credit one of our safety picks as a STs ace. All of these guys may have starting potential (I argue that they do), but our STs should show immediate improvement.
My only remaining concern is our STs coach. We’ll have to see how that shakes out.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 4:19 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
ha
yeah apparently I missed the like 800 comments at the end of this thread where people are finding the quotes I saw yesterday =)
I don’t know much about Priefer but here is a blurb of stats shamelessly stolen from denverbroncos.com:
During his three seasons with the Chiefs, Priefer helped punter Dustin Colquitt register the third-best net punting average (39.2 yds.) and the sixth-best gross punting average (44.8 yds.) in the NFL for that period. Colquitt’s net punting averages for each of his three seasons under Priefer rank as the top three single-year performances in Chiefs history.
Kansas City also placed fifth in the AFC in opponent punt return average (8.2 yds.) in Priefer’s three years as special teams coach and blocked a total of four kicks (3 punts, 1 field goal) during that period.
by Todd Jewell on Apr 27, 2009 4:29 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
And now we have Dustin's younger, drunk brother.
Woohoot.
My roots are in Denver and my branches in Nebraska.
by Blackshirt4Broncos on Apr 27, 2009 11:32 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
great points HT & Todd
Broncoman, thanks…just wanted to see what your thought process was!
by super7 on Apr 27, 2009 9:49 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
In business terms, the Patriots have a mature product. The Broncos are still in beta-testing
McDaniels and Bellichick handled the draft differently because there organizations aare in substantially different places. The Patriots won 27 games over the last 2 seasons (to the Broncos’ 15). They’re a very good team right now. They need to build the defense for the long term, sure, but they’re a point where trading back, hording future picks and fleshing out depth is the right thing to do.
That’s just not where the Broncos are. They had specific and glaring weaknesses in the secondary (moreso than on the DL, I’d argue), running backs who lost the football more than once every 20 carries, dead-last special teams, horrible pass defense when the QB gets beyond the first read, etc. The Broncos needed some specific players to do specific things. They identified them and went out and grabbed them. If they return to the top, I’d be thrilled to see them draft like the Pats — trade down, mange depth, hoard cap room. That would be the wrong, wrong strategy here. You need to add viable starters first, then you look at adding ridiculous amounts of depth.
by Chibronx on Apr 27, 2009 2:35 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't see too many viable starters
Moreno will likely be a starter, but Ayers likely won’t be, Smith won’t be, and neither will the Safeties or TE, so how many viable starters did we add?
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the one with the gun, A-hole" - Ash from Army of Darkness
by Broncoman on Apr 27, 2009 2:42 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ayers will be starting at DE by mid-season...
by anotherNYCbroncofan on Apr 27, 2009 2:47 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why, nothing I have read said he would be a DE
His interview said they wanted him to convert to an OLB, those conversions take time, especially for a guy who right now is more athlete than football player. I think starting him at DE honestly would be a mistake anyways, he is rather undersized for a 3-4 end, I could see him lining up there on passing downs, but I think he would struggle in holding the point of attack on running plays as a DE.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the one with the gun, A-hole" - Ash from Army of Darkness
by Broncoman on Apr 27, 2009 3:37 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
pure speculation
how did you come to that conclusion?
by super7 on Apr 27, 2009 2:51 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
everything on this post is pure speculation....
in that none of it can be proven otherwise until some point in the future and most of it can’t be proven at all…my opinion is based on my assessment of the talent we have and the talent that Ayers represents…got a better opinion ??
by anotherNYCbroncofan on Apr 27, 2009 2:56 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not "pure"
I think both sides are presenting specualtion, but it is diluted with reasoning and analysis.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 4:03 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well simple
RB- Moreno will likely start, too much money to sit on the bench
Ayers is a 4-3 DE that will be asked to convert to a 3-4 OLB, that is not an easy switch for a player that has never played LB and never played in the NFL or in a 3-4 system, I doubt he will be trusted with coverages and the likes as a rookie, likely put in on passing downs as obvious rusher, but I doubt will have that much impact as a rookie.
A. Smith – Already have starters set, Smith will be battling Williams for a shot at ncikle, I don’t call it a foregone conclusion that he will be the nickle back, I still think Williams and him are the same player, except Williams has a year of experience that Smith doesn’t.
Starting safeties set, so why would either play anything other than ST at this point.
We already have the premier blocking TE, so other than maybe a three TE set, no need for another blocking TE.
The rest are developmental prospects at this point and will be fighting for roster spots or spots on the practice squad.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the one with the gun, A-hole" - Ash from Army of Darkness
by Broncoman on Apr 27, 2009 3:42 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
BM
Look again.
What are the ages of the current CBs, the current safeties, and our current blocking TE (and don’t forget 4 looming contracts in there, Bailey’s far from the least).
I wouldn’t call these rookies career back-ups by any stretch.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 4:06 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree that the secondary will need to be replaced, but I guess I don't share the optimisum that the guys we drafted are the answer
Again, A. Smith will struggle to be anything more than a 2nd tier CB, do you trade the potential of a guy like Taylor Mays for a guy with the potential of Jack Williams? Again safeties next year are far better than the guys this year (IMO), and I much rather they taken a guy like Sean Smith in the 2nd versus MacBeth, with Smith you have a big CB who could convert to S if he doesn’t work out at CB.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the one with the gun, A-hole" - Ash from Army of Darkness
by Broncoman on Apr 27, 2009 4:23 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
And that's the main point of the draft
To replace aging players who’s time in the NFL is ticking. Looking at it that way, we had a very good draft.
If we could have just screwed another head on his shoulders, he would have been the greatest QB who ever lived.
by c_style on Apr 27, 2009 4:23 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm also not clear
how are the Broncos definitely getting Taylor Mays again? That seems a lot to revolve around…
by underdog on Apr 27, 2009 4:25 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
There is no definate way, but when you cash your chips in early then
it’s harder to get in the bigger game next year. There obviously is no guarentees, but I am guessing with 2 1st rounders we have a much better shot at getting a guy like Mays, or Spikes, or whoever you want to put in there.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the one with the gun, A-hole" - Ash from Army of Darkness
by Broncoman on Apr 27, 2009 4:28 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
McD is playing for this year
He has said so many times before. He also backed it up when he traded our 1st rounder next year instead of Chicago’s. He saying we’re going to win now. He’s saying Chicago’s pick WILL be a better pick than ours. He wants to win now, as he should. His main goal is to win a SB. He’s planning for that pick Seattle has to be #32.
You don’t want a coach who basically gives up this year and is betting on getting good picks in next years draft. He is drafting for this season. If next years draft is so great why draft at all this year? Why not just trade, trade, tarde all for next years picks? We have a season to play this year, that’s why.
If we could have just screwed another head on his shoulders, he would have been the greatest QB who ever lived.
by c_style on Apr 27, 2009 4:51 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe the LA-LA Land prediction should be 3-4 BABY
3-4 defense 3-4 SB record
"My job description is to win football games. I'm a hard worker. I'm not flashy by any means, but my job is to play football and win and I plan to do that." Kyle Orton
by odarol on Apr 27, 2009 5:11 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
That was also Shanny's logic
Look, in all honesty, if he thinks with the players we picked up and who we lost that this team will be ready to compete at a SB level this year, then he has been smoking way too much wacky tobaco.
I want this team to win, this year and five years from now, but putting all your eggs into this years draft basket is not a wise move. This is the same thought process that had us pay a very high price to pick guys like Jarvis Moss and Marcus Thomas, a let’s risk it all now versus a measured long term approach and good evaluation of this year’s draft and next years, and the year after.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the one with the gun, A-hole" - Ash from Army of Darkness
by Broncoman on Apr 27, 2009 5:35 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
We didn't put all our eggs into this years draft basket
You’re acting as if we traded away our only 1st round pick next year. We still can pick up quality guys in next years draft. We had 2 1st rounders and we traded 1 of them for a high second round pick this year. That is what next years 1st round picks are worth, this years 2nd rounders. Why are you acting like we got hosed with that trade? We used it to pick a ball hawking CB who they graded to be first round talent. At a position that is aging for us to boot. With a 1st rounder in our hands next year still, how is that placing all our eggs into this years draft basket? We traded one of our next years 1st round picks for 1st round talent now and only had to pay him 2nd round $. Not as stupid of a move as you seem to suggest. Not stupid at all in my opinion.
If we could have just screwed another head on his shoulders, he would have been the greatest QB who ever lived.
by c_style on Apr 28, 2009 12:48 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
That ball hawking CB
Has serious Physical limitations (5’ 9", 4.56 forty), he will struggle at the next level and will likely never be anything more than a number 2 CB, so I will ask you, if you had a choice and could get Ronnie Lott by waiting a year or have Ray Mickens this year, who would you take? To me we choose Mickens which seems short sighted at best.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the one with the gun, A-hole" - Ash from Army of Darkness
by Broncoman on Apr 28, 2009 1:05 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh foreseer of the future
Please tell me which of our other draft picks will struggle at the NFL level too.
That ball hawk CB had over 20 INT’s in his collegiate carreer. He was widely considered the best CB in the draft at getting interceptions. Darrent had “phisical limitations” too and I would take him on my team any day. nNone of us know how good Smith will be in the years to come, and a #1 pick next year doesn’t guarantee us a player of Ronnie Lotts caliber. Most people seem to admit that nobody knows how these picks will turn out, most people except you. Since you obviously have future telling abilities, why aren’t you working as a scout for an NFL team. Your talents are in high demand!
If we could have just screwed another head on his shoulders, he would have been the greatest QB who ever lived.
by c_style on Apr 28, 2009 5:01 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I only listed him as best ball hawking CB.
Since writing the article, I’ve found a few sources listing him as the best CB period.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 28, 2009 6:31 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
interestingly
Mcdaniel’s mentioned in his interview on ESPN that he preferred to go up against bigger corners on offense, and that their criteria didn’t value 6’ CBs an more than anyone else.
He pointed out that the tall ones are an assett for “jump balls” and that there are hardly any jump balls through the course of the season anyway.
He definitely has strident evaluation parameters for his DBs.
There is no army so powerful as an idea whose time has come.
by Jeremy Bolander on Apr 28, 2009 7:24 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
do you have a link to this interview?
I’m intrigued.
by CoastalBronco on Apr 29, 2009 10:27 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Royal W/ Cheese
put it up in the fanshots.
There is no army so powerful as an idea whose time has come.
by Jeremy Bolander on Apr 29, 2009 10:34 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just a comment
Ayers is a 4-3 DE that will be asked to convert to a 3-4 OLB, that is not an easy switch for a player that has never played LB and never played in the NFL or in a 3-4 system, I doubt he will be trusted with coverages and the likes as a rookie, likely put in on passing downs as obvious rusher, but I doubt will have that much impact as a rookie.
Ayers did play LB in college. He was used, variously and effectively, at LB, DE and DT. He is also skilled in coverage and proved that in college.
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Apr 27, 2009 4:48 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
You are right.
Even NFL.com lists him as a LB. But I project him as a DE (as did several folks on draft day). I have a hard time envisioning him as a LB for Denver.
Good call Doc.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 4:55 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
From the highlites I have seen
I don’t see the “skilled” coverage, seems like he was predominately a 4-3 DE, played a little rush OLB, and was sometimes moved inside. I don’t know if saying a kid stood up and rushed off the end qualifies as “playing” LB, but time will tell how well he can transition. But I have only seen highlites and did not catch too many Vols games. A one year starter I don’t think you have proved anything other than you had a good year. He may work out great, hopefully he does, but I think he will have a hard time transitioning to the NFL and will likely have little impact as a rookie. I think Mayock was probably correct, in 3 to 4 years he will be the best defensive player in this draft, but I tend to agree, it will likely take 3 to 4 years for him to really be an effective player.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the one with the gun, A-hole" - Ash from Army of Darkness
by Broncoman on Apr 27, 2009 5:48 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
BM
I know. I’m referring to games that I saw and people from the area that I’ve talked to. He did play as a LB, and he was good in coverage. i wouldn’t say it just to poke at you.
As far as your opinion – no one can say, and yours is as good as anyones
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Apr 27, 2009 5:51 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
In several instances (not yet all)...
I can find some common ground in BM’s comment. There’s hope for me (or him).
lol
: )
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 6:14 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who are all these definite
immediate starters that we missed out on for that matter? Just curious.
If Ayers isn’t a starter next year (and I think he will be by mid-season, as NYCb posted), then who should they have taken at #18 who definitely would have been starting from day 1 next season in your estimation?
by underdog on Apr 27, 2009 2:53 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's the point, I don't see a lot of viable starters in this year's draft
But I see two immediate starters in Brandon Spikes and Taylor Mays that would provide immediate upgrade to the defense next year, in addition to guys like Cody, Suh who would be starting NT’s on this team right now, so those are who we need to be targeting. I just think everyone has a lot of faith in a DE converting to a 3-4 OLB in a short time and having an impact this year, it is not very likely.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the one with the gun, A-hole" - Ash from Army of Darkness
by Broncoman on Apr 27, 2009 3:32 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
So we replace our holes this year...
…with the draft next year. I’m missing something.
As a few comment makers have pointed out, that is all well and good if the team is already stacked (NE, DAL followed your lead). But with a team full of holes (and no players available in this year’s draft for specific holes), you follow the lead of Denver last year (excellent draft by the way) or the early Patriots (pre-Rams Superbowl). Just my opinion.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 4:09 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
What holes are we replacing this year
Again the logic is failing me here, outside of Moreno, which one of these draft picks are going to play significant time this year? Ayers may have a shot, but I think it is streching it. I will put it to you like this, suppose you knew that Ronnie Lott would be available next year but you felt like you had to fill the hole this year with Marlon McCree, what would you do? That’s what I feel like we have done.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the one with the gun, A-hole" - Ash from Army of Darkness
by Broncoman on Apr 27, 2009 4:25 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who will be starting..
From an earlier answer I gave:
Moreno – absolutely.
Ayers – I believe he will.
Smith – Absolutely, at nickle. (But both CBs ahead of him are in their 30s)
The Safeties – No, but that is only because we brought in two very talented safeties in FA (but both of whom are in their 30s).
Quinn – Absolutely (at least in short yardage and running downs).
That covers the first 3 rounds, from which teams hope for starters.
As to “which holes”, that’s the mindset of drafting by need. Again, BM, the point of this draft wasn’t to fill holes. We aren’t even trying to! We are trying to bring in the best available players.
You can’t grade a “best availaibe” draft strategy with a “needs based” strategy mindset (or vice versa).
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 4:29 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
What I am getting at is that if this was truly a BPA approach
Why trade away the future to move up for what is a marginal 1st round talent, why not sit back, not panic, and let the guys come to you and truly get the BPA that will help fill the roster, point being is that McDaniels did draft for need (maybe not the need everyone sees) but the less obvious need, but rather than get the BPA for that need he mortgaged the future in hopes that these guys are better than advertised. When you have teams desperate to move down, you know it is not a solid draft, trust me, this draft will be a lot closer to the 07 versus 08.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the one with the gun, A-hole" - Ash from Army of Darkness
by Broncoman on Apr 27, 2009 4:35 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know about the strength of this draft class vs. next year's
but I agree that the BPA argument would be stronger if McD & Co. had not kept moving up and trading away picks.
Given the trades, it at least “felt” like we were desperate to fill needs — which only made several of the picks that much more confusing/frustrating.
by Elway's Ghost on Apr 27, 2009 4:44 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
We weren't desperate to fill needs.
Change your perspective, and look at this from another angle. We weren’t desperate to fill any needs or holes.
We were motivated to get the best players on the board, and nothing more. Both of our significant trade-ups did that. They also saved money (by reducing picks and taking high talent in lower rounds).
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 4:51 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you are getting closer with that thought, but not quite there yet,
We didn’t mortage the future.
We picked up 10 rookies this year. There’s a lot of future there!
Again, as people have tried to explain, a team without the depth chart of the Patriots can’t trade ahead. The Patriots didn’t do that for years (but they DID draft best available). Taken to an absurd conclusion, why not just always trade ahead and never us a pick at all? Because there has to be a payoff year, and that year is when the team doesn’t have depth.
We traded a first round pick for a player considered by many to be a first round talent. We STILL have a first round pick next year. We had 10 picks this year (five in the first two rounds!) Should we complain that we have “a bird in the hand” right now, instead of speculative picks in the future?
Will we be able to afford so many high round picks next year? Remember, Denver is cah strapped NOW. Next year may enter an uncapped period too (though I don’t think it will).
When we have a Patriots roster and depth chart, we’ll trade ahead too. But in the lean years, NE just went best available. I think they did the right thing.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 4:49 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
In that vein
The Pats didn’t trade up and mortage their future picks either, my point being that having two first rounders next year I think would of paid off much more than an extra 2nd rounder this year. Had we stayed with the true BPA and not traded up, it’s hard not to reason that we would not of gotten the same players or very similar player to what we got in the draft. But instead we reached, with hopes that next year’s draft will be worse, which I don’t and any expert I have heard doesn’t think will be the case.
As far as the economics, maybe that is what is driving this, you could make the arguement that paying a 2nd rounder this year will be cheaper than a 1st rounder next year, but I think then you are pinching pennies versus trying to get better. Same vein, one 2nd rounder is cheaper than paying two 3rd rounders, but again, there is a rookie salary allotment so that really shouldn’t be an issue.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the one with the gun, A-hole" - Ash from Army of Darkness
by Broncoman on Apr 27, 2009 4:57 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess I would argue that the bird in the hand is a pigeon
And I see two big plump Turkeys sitting by the bush ready to be nabbed. I understand wanting to eat the pigeon when you are hungry, but usally the best hunters are the most patient and would be willing to risk the pigeon for a shot at the Turkeys.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the one with the gun, A-hole" - Ash from Army of Darkness
by Broncoman on Apr 27, 2009 5:01 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you are saying fundamentally
that you don’t think these players will be very good, and likely not starters (with some exceptions). Is that correct?
I ask because the discussion has covered a lot of ground and every time I think you’ve clearly stated that, it seems like the discussion moves on without accepting that point…
There is no army so powerful as an idea whose time has come.
by Jeremy Bolander on Apr 27, 2009 11:15 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
My fundlemental points
Moreno – Too high for a RB, likely a good RB, but the same value could likely be had later in the draft (see McFaden vs Slaton for similar analysis)
Ayers – Probably good, but a high boom/bust potential (similar to Moss), he will be a conversion project and will take time to see real payoff, I would of prefered Rey, but I can understand the logic on the pick and won’t argue over a player.
A. Smith – Very good college player but his height and speed will not allow him to be anything more than a 2nd tier CB, paid way too much for a No. 2 CB at best when there are much better prospects next year available.
McBath – We didn’t pay anything extra for, I am fine with the pick if that was who they thought was the BPA, I would argue Sean Smith at that point since he can play CB, is big and could slide to safety if he has trouble at CB.
Quinn- Way too much to give up for a blocking TE, sign Chad Mustard and don’t worry about it or wait until he falls to you in the 3rd and take him there, this was not a need and I am doubtful this was truly the BPA.
Other picks are crap shot anyways, I could argue the merits or demerits, but kind of silly arguing about 4th + rounders. Bottom line is I think we paid too much for the value we got, next years draft is much better in terms of safety and other prospects, to me its like saying you can have Marlon McCree this year or if you want to wait we will give you a fresh Ronnie Lott, we chose to take McCree, there is the analogy in a nut shell.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the one with the gun, A-hole" - Ash from Army of Darkness
by Broncoman on Apr 28, 2009 12:19 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
My take:
Moreno: he is another LT and will be the player that changes the fortunes of the team from the get go. Best value pick in the draft.
Ayers: So unlike Jarvis it aint funny. Has a bigger frame to get to 290. Can shake out at the 5 technique as well as bring pressure from the edge. Multi talented and unblockable (Andre Smith and Michale Oher could not touch him). Great value at 18.
Alphonso Smith: Rated as one of the best CB’s in the NFL. A turnover machine. Also a ST ace.
Darcel McBath: Hard hitting, fast safety that also brings it on special teams. High character guy.
Quinn: Please, no Chad Mustard comparisons. Quinn runs a 4.7…..Chad not near that, and he is MUCH bigger recieving threat than Chad will ever be.
Bruton: Best ST player in the draft. Fast, great hitter and team captain at ND.
I definitely DONT agree on your perspective of next years draft. There are 2 VERY good safetys coming out…..and then the class dips off substantially.
Anyway, my take.
I rarely agree with you Broncoman, but thanks for the style you bring it in.
Peace!
I could go on, but EVERY guy brought in
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
All I want is 53 Rod Smiths. Is that asking too much????
by boydy2669 on Apr 28, 2009 7:21 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
So should we have traded all of our picks this year
and have 17 picks next year?
Have a good time all the time...that's my motto. - Viv Savage
by TD4HOF on Apr 27, 2009 7:39 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, but I would of been really happy if we traded one of our firsts this year
for a 2nd this year and a 1st next year, three firsts next year could of set the Broncos up for a dynasty, think of a defense of Spikes, Mays, and Cody, all of them would be 1sts this year (likely top 15) and all would start today for Denver. Rome wasn’t built in a day.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the one with the gun, A-hole" - Ash from Army of Darkness
by Broncoman on Apr 28, 2009 12:21 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dude, we cant afford to pay 3 x 1st round picks....not even 2.....
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
All I want is 53 Rod Smiths. Is that asking too much????
by boydy2669 on Apr 28, 2009 7:23 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
That doesn't make much sense
There is a rookie pool for salaries based on how many picks you have and where you picked them, paying them really wouldn’t be an issue. I would have faith that we could find a way to get guys under contract, seems silly to give up on talent over a rookie contracts.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the one with the gun, A-hole" - Ash from Army of Darkness
by Broncoman on Apr 28, 2009 1:10 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Suh is going to be a beast with another year learning from Pelini!
My roots are in Denver and my branches in Nebraska.
by Blackshirt4Broncos on Apr 27, 2009 11:33 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hate to agree with a Nebraska fan, but I agree
Suh would of been selected ahead of Raji this year, I hate the fact that we likely missed out on him or someone of his quality (Cody or McCoy in Oklahoma).
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the one with the gun, A-hole" - Ash from Army of Darkness
by Broncoman on Apr 28, 2009 12:23 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
we can always hope he flies a little under the radar...
My roots are in Denver and my branches in Nebraska.
by Blackshirt4Broncos on Apr 28, 2009 1:12 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Suh would have declared for the draft this year...
I do not believe he would have been quite ready to contribute at the NFL level. With another year of college ball (& strength development) under his belt along with the tutelage of Pelini (D-linemen seem to be his fortay? – just don’t compare Suh to Dorsey…) he should be able to come in his rookie year and contribute. In either scenario it is not until the 2010 season that he contributes at the NFL level.
I just hope he is adding some of that “good weight” to quote Ayers in his press conference – and learns how to play all the d-line techniques.
My roots are in Denver and my branches in Nebraska.
by Blackshirt4Broncos on Apr 28, 2009 1:17 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rajo would be 2nd or 3rd round next year. He is not anywhere near SUh or Cody.
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
All I want is 53 Rod Smiths. Is that asking too much????
by boydy2669 on Apr 28, 2009 7:23 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd lik to hear your theory on...
why the Green Bay Packers,
Dallas Cowboys,
S.F. 49’ner,
Broncos,
lost their form after their Superbowl runs and how does that translate to the Giants?
by lovewatchinthegame on Apr 27, 2009 9:08 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well my theory is simple
Packers lost Ron Wolf and Mike Holgram – lost leadership in the front office.
Cowboys – Lost Jimmy Johnson and had you know who calling the shots
49ers – Ownership transition and move away from the Walsh discipline and evaluation, I think they struggled between listening to Walsh versus their HC, and ended up picking an unhappy medium that got them nowhere, losing an owner like DeBartolo hurt that team tremendously, even though he is a tax cheat, he understands how to run a team.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the one with the gun, A-hole" - Ash from Army of Darkness
by Broncoman on Apr 28, 2009 12:28 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
How that translates to the Giants
I know Ernie Acorsie retired so they may struggle somewhat in the GM department, I think being a NY GM probably toughest GM role in the league, but I like their current GM and I think they can easily reload, time will tell if they got the right ammo.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the one with the gun, A-hole" - Ash from Army of Darkness
by Broncoman on Apr 28, 2009 12:31 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
NE Philosophy
How do you know NE would have traded out at 12 and at 18 though? I’m betting they don’t, especially at 12. It all depends on need (which NE has far less then Den) and what the draft board says.
And taking the best possible player, which Den did, is a NE philosophy.
Just because this was a ‘poor’ draft overall doesn’t mean that it is full of poor players.
by RudyR on Apr 27, 2009 2:42 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am guessing they would of tried like hell, they probably would of kept one, but I am guessing would of trade the other
Belichick said he thought this was a bad draft going in and he didn’t like that many players. The point is NE did not reach for players, they kept getting more chips and are now positioned very well for next year.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the one with the gun, A-hole" - Ash from Army of Darkness
by Broncoman on Apr 27, 2009 2:44 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Understood
But Denver needs players now, whereas NE does not. And Denver did not reach for need on D with the 12th pick, therefore they tood the best back in the draft (by most accounts). Good teams have the luxury of trading away opportunity because they don’t need it now, whereas Denver needs to fill every hole possible.
Do I wish they found a quality DT in the draft, absolutely but I am glad they didn’t reach for one.
by RudyR on Apr 27, 2009 2:49 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
McD commented that people wanted to move up to 18 and down to 12. I don’t see us moving into the top 10 as a good idea and I think at 18 Ayers was a Blue Chip DE prospect and there weren’t too many left then. I don’t think he lasts so if anything they went for a need there which I respect.
Don't jump off the cliff but if the guys next to you are loud and annoying try to push them off.
by Kfustud on Apr 27, 2009 2:45 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Starting to really like the A. Smith move
I HATED it at first, but getting a guy who was widely considered a 1st rounder for second rounder money for a bunch of years is great. Not like we don’t have a 1st rounder next year. You can’t get to bent outta shape about trading picks, maybe we reached, but nothing ventured, nothing earned.
I thought Denver reached on a few guys, but seeing that Belichick, Mangini, and McD all stockpiled picks in the 2nd round, its obvious that there was a strength in that part of the draft that none of these guys wanted to ignore. And they each have more Super Bowl rings than all of the other coaches combined.
Forget the big names in the draft that we were all spoonfed for 4 months. They don’t matter, now lets see who got great value and who is paying through the nose (everyone in the top 10).
McD didn’t think drafting anyone else was as much of a sure thing as Moreno. If he’s gonna pay someone that kind of money, he’s going to take a sure thing, and that’s what he did. Will anyone remember this draft for anything other than Moreno if he realizes his full potential?
And I was VEHEMENTLY agains going offense in the first 2 rounds. But the logic here makes perfect sense in a Billy Beane kind of way.
by super7 on Apr 27, 2009 2:51 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
You make a great point that I missed Super.
We did stockpile picks. Right in the second round where the value was.
You also make a solid point on Smith that I didn’t miss, but didn’t put to (virtual) paper either. Smith was considered a 1st round talent, and we got him in the second and will be paying him as such. A future first was a fair trade, even if it looked like a dangerous move.
As Maylok pointed out, “I hate seeing them trade a future first for a player in the second, but let’s be honest. He’s a great player, and at the end of the day that’s all that will matter. All of these guys Denver is taking are very good players”.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 4:16 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Broncoman
You are the voice of reason against the draft, and i welcome you comments.
We disagree on the merits of each of the picks, and I’ll let my points in the story speak for themselves. But I very much disagree with the underlying premise that we didn’t resemble NE’s draft strategy. Here’s why.
NE (like Dallas) traded out for future picks. Why? Because they have a solid roster right now. Even without many of their players (Brady is the prime example), they win year after year because they built up with best available. I expect McDaniels will follow that course. For now, this is a team full of holes and can’t wait for future picks.
I’ve rec’d your comment by the way. It goes to show that people can disagree, love their team, and still come to opposite (but smart) conclusions.
You are a big reason why people come to MHR. Intelligent debate and good people.
Now for the team’s sake let us all hope that you were wrong. : )
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 3:51 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hope I am wrong too
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the one with the gun, A-hole" - Ash from Army of Darkness
by Broncoman on Apr 27, 2009 5:50 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Either way...
We win together, or go down swinging together my friend. That’s all that matters in the end.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 6:16 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I also appreciate this comment.
As well as the discussion that followed.
by Elway's Ghost on Apr 27, 2009 4:34 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Some of the trolls from the weekend could have learned a trick or two here.
This is how grown men reason.
BM and I aren’t finding much common ground. But we both have smart ideas and reasoned discourse. As important, we both love our team and want it to suceed.
I’ll take a foxhole with Broncoman over a “yes man” and a steak dinner with a troll any day.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 4:59 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Which BM are you referring too?
Killing two birds with one stone?
My roots are in Denver and my branches in Nebraska.
by Blackshirt4Broncos on Apr 27, 2009 11:36 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
BM - Broncoman
Is a good guy, and proves that you can disagree with a team’s moves and be a good fan. I’ve been the “disagreer” before, most notably attacking our defensive AND offensive coordinators last year. (The year before, we had a terrible defense, but I understood the coordinator and the system. I just thought he had the worng players for the system).
If you are playing on words for humor’s sake, I’ve got that covered. My favorite superhero is Bat Man. A “bowel movement” in medical abbr. is “bm”, lower cased. Thus if I am comparing Broncoman to anything, it is Bat Man, not a “poop”. So no, I’m not even trying to go after my good friend.
: )
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 28, 2009 8:03 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually...
Grown men reasoning in an attempt to find a common ground… is a place that made me think of where Brandon Marshall needs to end up… only in his case it apparently has more to do with grown couples finding a common ground.
A reach, perhaps, but now thanks to whenever I see BM I’ll think three things in no particular order.
- Brandon Marshall
- Broncoman
- Bowel movement
My roots are in Denver and my branches in Nebraska.
by Blackshirt4Broncos on Apr 28, 2009 11:26 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the counterpoint
I enjoyed reading this; HT your original post was of course excellent as well, but it’s good to have some well thought-out debate.
by appleshampoo on Apr 27, 2009 5:41 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
MHR's stories are good. Real good.
But the quality of discussion and debate that we have in the comments are aways better.
I throw the idea out there. I’m a servant.
But the members pick it up and make something better of it. You guys are the reason that we are better than the old media. Our message boards are intelligent, classy, witty, and friendly. Sometimes we get a bad guy, but they either adapt or go away.
Glad to have you here!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 6:19 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thank YOU!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 4:23 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fanboy analysis
WTF is The Prestige ? I hate when people compare movies to real life situations.
by sdbaseballfan on Apr 27, 2009 2:36 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
you sound like Grumpy Smurf.
"C" is for Championship...that's good enough for meeeee!!!
by PosterNutbag on Apr 27, 2009 2:39 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I HATE movie analogies!!! :-p
"C" is for Championship...that's good enough for meeeee!!!
by PosterNutbag on Apr 27, 2009 2:42 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's an interesting movie
worth checking out. I thought his analogy was clever, actually.
Also, when you think about it, is sports really that much more “real” than movies. Players and actors, coaches and directors, they all make a product that we either approve of or don’t. Is mixing the two of them together really that sacrilegious?
Though I kind of liked the movie “The Illusionist” from the same year better.
by underdog on Apr 27, 2009 2:52 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed...
The Illusionist was a great movie. They were both good…but I prefered The Illusionist as well.
"C" is for Championship...that's good enough for meeeee!!!
by PosterNutbag on Apr 27, 2009 3:32 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I liked both...
…and would have a hard time choosing.
I’m a big Michael Caine fan though, so that might tip it.
And yes, if you want a great movie experience, watch each one.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 4:26 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Prestige.
I explained the term in the quote at the very start of my article. You don’t need to see the movie to understand the quote.
But I recommend the movie highly.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 4:24 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Another great post HT.
I’m a little concerned how many of the MHR folks didn’t care for the OL picks (I really don’t know anything about them).
The more I learn about Moreno and Ayers the more I like them. In fact, I may even get a Moreno jersey to replace my ’what’s his name’ jersey. I may not have wanted a RB with the first pick…but everybody loves a great RB.
"C" is for Championship...that's good enough for meeeee!!!
by PosterNutbag on Apr 27, 2009 2:38 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Few people like OL picks.
They aren’t flashy.
The Clady pick was an amazing pick last year. Thank God we got him. But most people focus on “skilled” positions too much (forgetting the need to have support players).
Thanks for the kind words Poster.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 4:32 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Which seems to run counter to why people are angry about this draft.
First off, very intriguing article, and certainly got me thinking and looking at things from a new perspective. With that said, I still disagree about a few points.
Yes, Clady was one of those rare occasions where a big need and the best value went hand in hand.
People tend to focus on the “skill positions” which was the greatest focus of the draft, and people seem to be livid that the front seven wasn’t addressed more.
We hear it over and over, and I personally believe it to be true, teams are built from the inside out. I understand the best available philosophy. But right now I really am trusting that McDaniels saw something out of the guys we have to make him think the front seven is set. Obviously we are not going to turn into the Ravens or Steelers overnight.
Obviously I am not a talent scout (though if somebody was willing to pay me to let me try I think I would have to give it a shot!) but I question if we really did get the best value. Obviously the guys paid to do it felt different, but I thought there was some great front seven talent still available. I have seen alot of people say things along the lines “why waste picks drafting someone who wouldn’t even make the roster.” now this is my completely insignificant opinion, but calling last year’s front seven awful would be a compliment. Aside from the Ayers, pick I don’t see it being too much different. So the point here is that any front seven guy we might have drafted in my opinion would have had to have been pretty awful to not beat out what we had. Then again maybe the coaches saw something and the guys had monster workouts. Just my thoughts, but I see Andra Davis as Nate Webster, just minus the celebrations. Again, entirely possible he wowed the staff. That and our defense did slightly resemble an actual NFL defense when Woodyard, Larsen, and Winborn were the linebackers.
While I believe that Ayers was a very solid pick (even more so since you mentioned if absolutely necessary he can move to NT,) I do believe concerns about the front seven are legitimate. Now you can have Champ, Namndi however you spell his last name, Bob Sanders, and Ed Reed as your secondary, if they have to cover guys all day, even they can be burned. Just look at the Giants two years ago, great line, good front seven, average or even below average secondary, and they shut down the most prolific offense in years.
One thing that confused me, in your evaluation of Ayers, you state that sacks are way overated, but in your evaluation of Smith, you tout “he gets alot of sacks from the CB position” as one (though admittedly one of his “icing on the cake” assets) Maybe I just read it wrong?
With all this said, I do think we got solid players, though I believe we may have reached on some. I think Smith would have been there at 48, and Quinn would have there in later rounds.
I am guessing it looks like I am going off a needs rather than value evaluation, and yes I was hoping to see at least one more front seven guy taken but like I said, I though there were some players of high value at those positions. Hopefully I was wrong. I just get the feeling, “what was the point of the free agent signings?”
by BroncoDragon on Apr 29, 2009 3:30 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for another great read...
I am psyched about this draft and this team ! You’ve laid out a series of great arguments for the existence of a new philosophy being implemented with discipline and vision and I am excited about it.
by anotherNYCbroncofan on Apr 27, 2009 2:42 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
New for us.
The Patriots have been doing it for years. It is so effective for them, that they now have the luxury of trading for future and higher picks.
Thanks for the great comment.
: )
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 4:36 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bringing It Once Again
Thanks for the good stuff. Looking at the draft holistically, we got a very good haul, regardless of need or value.
by studbucket on Apr 27, 2009 2:46 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
That's the way to read it (if you are in a "best available" mindset).
The needs based thinker says “But we didn’t get X”, but the best available says “But we got a better player”.
It all comes down to if you can judge a draft in the context it was used. You can’t grade a NEEDS draft by BEST standards, or vice versa. I think the biggest arguments against our draft are from a NEEDS perspective. From a BEST perspective, I haven’t read a critical remark (that I’ve seen).
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 4:39 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great Stuff HT....
.Round 1 Thread I jokingly said, “I plan on doing my mock draft either Monday or Tuesday—I think the picture will be much clearer then.”
Therefore one of my favorite statements of your post is this:
This is why I avoid making mock predictions, and why I leave draft boards and college players to others with more skill than I have. I focus on the result of the actual draft, and make my case there.
.
.I also think this was a great draft—got a little confused as it occured—but began to love the picks as I read about each player.
.

.Playoffs here we come !!
Guardian of the Gate to La La Land!
Little, Wright, Atwater, Davis, and Sharpe...
Why are they not in the Hall...I just don't understand.
by Mike Clark on Apr 27, 2009 2:47 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Broncoman is a great example of a great fan...
…and MHR family member who takes a tough love approach with the team. He’s no troll.
You take the opposite corner, happy and optimistic, but friendly to all who disagree. You’re no homer.
You and BM and everything between is what makes this site so great.
(No, no playoffs). lol
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 5:02 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I,m with you Mr. Clark-----Always love your writeups HT, not only food for thought, but a voice of reason among
the ocean of fanaticism.
Playoffs here we come!!!
Real Power, comes with the realization that One cannot change the Moment;
only ones perception of it: Atitude! JQM
by UB3 on Apr 27, 2009 5:47 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the kind words..
..and for the hot avatar!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 6:21 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Me Too Mike
Thanks to MHR!
My Dad told me about the 4 seasons:
Pre-season
Regular-season
Post-season
Off-season
by KaptainKirk on Apr 28, 2009 7:41 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great post HT, rec'd
After reading this, I still think that we had a good draft. I was having trouble getting excited about what we had done though. As a fan, I came out feelin kinda blah after sitting in front of the tv for hours and hours spread over Saturday and Sunday.
But after reading this article, I feel great! Very excited to see what these “bests” can do on the field. Is it September yet?!?!
The healing process has begun....
by ohiobronco on Apr 27, 2009 2:51 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Love your sig.
It’s always September at MHR.
I’m glad you’re here!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 5:03 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Smith Jersey
I thin we should all go get Alphonso Smith jerseys now.
1 I like this kids talent and think he will be good
2 It will remind everyone about the 2nd for a 1st trade which as we all know “Was the worst thing ever.”
Don't jump off the cliff but if the guys next to you are loud and annoying try to push them off.
by Kfustud on Apr 27, 2009 2:54 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't think it was a bad move at all..
McDaniels did an interview with espn radio this morning and said they had Alphonso boarded as a mid-to-late first round pick. In Josh’s view we just spent next years 1st on a 1st round tallent this year.
.
You Tube has several really good highlite videos—Alphonso is really good.
Guardian of the Gate to La La Land!
Little, Wright, Atwater, Davis, and Sharpe...
Why are they not in the Hall...I just don't understand.
by Mike Clark on Apr 27, 2009 3:04 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe I should write sarcasm. I am trying to remind the FOOLS who THINK that it was the worst thing ever. :)
Don't jump off the cliff but if the guys next to you are loud and annoying try to push them off.
by Kfustud on Apr 27, 2009 3:09 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
LOL....I wasn't sure...funny me...:)
Guardian of the Gate to La La Land!
Little, Wright, Atwater, Davis, and Sharpe...
Why are they not in the Hall...I just don't understand.
by Mike Clark on Apr 27, 2009 3:28 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I understood the sarcasm.
I smiled too!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 5:04 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Watching the YouTube Clips it seems like most of his interceptions were system based, or poor decisions by the QB. That said he does seem to have an ability to blend into the drop zone, which is likely to be his primary responsibility as nickel back. I kind of doubt he can come in and make the impact that everyone is predicting, but McDaniels must think he fits the system perfectly. I still struggle with giving up a first, even with all of the time value of money explanations being bandied about.
by legendarywalton on Apr 27, 2009 3:12 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually...
those highlight videos are what made me think the Broncs are going to blitz their nutz off. Which should force some errant passes that Alphonso ‘INT’ Smith can go get. Also, it seems like he is much better in zone than man which might also tell you something about the defensive scheme this year.
"C" is for Championship...that's good enough for meeeee!!!
by PosterNutbag on Apr 27, 2009 3:16 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
We’re going to have to bring a ton of pressure in my opinion, because recycling what we had on the field last year just won’t get it done (I understand that the coaching staff seems to disagree with me). If that’s the case we may be running a 1-3-7 with all the ballhawking DBs we drafted. If we can find a way to stop the run on 1st down, he may see a lot of playing time.
by legendarywalton on Apr 27, 2009 3:20 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've never understood the 1-3-7 argument.
We have Dawkins and Hill at SAF, and Bailey and Goodman at CB (and now Smith at nickle).
We have plenty of existing players and newly arrived FAs (and a first round draft pick) to choose from on the front seven.
The real argument you would seem to be making isn’t that we have plenty of DBs and no front 7, but that we just don’t have the front seven players that you want.
Unless I’m missing a humor filled angle of sarcasm (which is easy to do).
: )
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 5:36 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Funny you should say that Poster..
In my rediculous post about 2009 season I had this thought.
.
The Steelers are very confident coming into their 9th game undefeated, however, McDaniels really pulls out the stops on defense with constant creative blitzes. Rothlesburger goes down in the 3rd quarter with a tremendous hit by Wesley Woodyard. Brandon and Eddie each have two touchdown receptions. Eddie also throws his first touchdown pass—all Denver loves Eddie!!
I think you are exactly right.
.

Guardian of the Gate to La La Land!
Little, Wright, Atwater, Davis, and Sharpe...
Why are they not in the Hall...I just don't understand.
by Mike Clark on Apr 27, 2009 3:27 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
and I for one am excited about it.
I LOVE blitzes. LOVE LOVE LOVE. I know that we’re going to get burnt badly sometimes…but we should also force some big plays. IMO, that is a million times better than watching the defense play conservatively and slowly get bled to death. I got really, REALLY tired of the bend and break defense.
No guts no glory.
"C" is for Championship...that's good enough for meeeee!!!
by PosterNutbag on Apr 27, 2009 3:30 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree...I hate blood with no purpose.
Guardian of the Gate to La La Land!
Little, Wright, Atwater, Davis, and Sharpe...
Why are they not in the Hall...I just don't understand.
by Mike Clark on Apr 27, 2009 3:31 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I believe you finally get your wish Poster.
This is shaping up to be an attacking defense. At the very least, the days of 3 man rushes are over.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 5:38 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
So are we going to employ one of the Pats infamous 1-3-7 schemes where we have one player using the zero technique and everyone else standing around? We will need to run blitz like crazy— in fact we may become too predictable, because I don’t see how we stop the run otherwise.
by legendarywalton on Apr 27, 2009 3:35 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would suggest reading the University posts about the 3-4 and then consider this post and personnel. I think you will be excited once you learn the answer.
Don't jump off the cliff but if the guys next to you are loud and annoying try to push them off.
by Kfustud on Apr 27, 2009 3:40 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’ve read through that and I understand that good rushing games will crush us without an established NT taking up multiple linemen. From that specific article, "Despite the fact that the Bullough can be confusing, the system relies on a lot of “bend; don’t break” thinking."
If we run the Bullough (which I don’t think we have enough size for up front) Isn’t that exactly what fans here are trying to stay away from?
by legendarywalton on Apr 27, 2009 3:47 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Creating movement and chaos on the line and tackling.
Don't jump off the cliff but if the guys next to you are loud and annoying try to push them off.
by Kfustud on Apr 27, 2009 4:16 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
From the author...
You are correct. The bend-don’t-break is not a prevent scheme though either. I’ll also grant you a point that you aren’t making, and that is a NT is critical to the system.
But there are variants. Nolan ran a F-B, but he did it with a strong inside blitzing scheme that uses a Ted LB to lead block the other ILB (something I haven’t seen from NE).
Also, a lot of fans (myself included) were furious at the 3 man rushes employed last year. By that standard, a typical 3 man rush (plus a blitzing LB) would be bringing the house by the standards of many disgruntled fans.
In the variant I project, we will lean closer to the Nolan vision. But your point is well taken. We may not. If we don’t, that’s still fine. There are several ways to approach any system. (The spread offense has dozens of variants).
But I might (slightly) disagree with size as an issue on the line. Yes, we need to be bigger. (I don’t accept a F-B NT in most cases if he’s less than 315). But we DO have a pretty big NT in FA pick-up Parker.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 6:07 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ya it hit me too when they announced the terms of the trade. I approached it as “what do they know that I don’t?” as opposed to “they guys must be morans.” After some analysis I think I see what they see and I am into it.
Plus don’t think he didn’t make interceptions for himself or that he wasn’t playing a role in scooping them up. You don’t hit the 20 milestone by accident.
Don't jump off the cliff but if the guys next to you are loud and annoying try to push them off.
by Kfustud on Apr 27, 2009 3:21 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like your thinking.
But I LOVE that sig!
LOL
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 6:25 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
QB mistakes and Smith interceptions.
Virtualy every interception is a QB mistake. But only a great CB can make a play on it.
If you have ever played CB or SAF, one thing probably stands out to you. It is very, very hard to be in the right place at the right time. It’s a difficult proposition to be in place AND have the upper hand when a QB makes a bad throw. Even when the pass is right on the CB’s numbers, most CBs are focused on playing the receiver (not the ball), as well as making an instant decision on whether to catch or “bat down”. CBs are coached to err on the side of a bat down for two reasons.
1) A botched interception not only can tip the ball to the receiver, but it leaves the CB out of position to cover the mistake, and
2) A bat down is more of a sure thing. An INT is a gamble by its very nature. The PRIME job of a DB is to break up passes, not get turnovers.
3) Because of (2) above, most CBs are likely to hesitate and blow a an INT because the first (coach instilled) instinct is to “bat down”.
For those reasons, a DB who STILL manages so many interceptions is a pleasant exception.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 5:12 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
E't voila' !
Presto!…..
I think the analysis is solid. Now, the plan simply needs to work out.
By the way, a 6’5" (or was it taller) statue of a quarterback suggests to me that he will be one tough son of a gun to knock down. Anyone remember Roman Gabriel? Or, perhaps a bit more contemporary – Ben Rothlisberger/
Big dudes in football typically give the team who has them the edge over the team who does not. Throw in some smaller guys with attitude and it is game over in my book.
I agree with Steve Young, Chris Berman, and almost every other so-called analyst in that this is a changed Broncos team. No denying it now. And I think it will be changed for the better.
I put it to you in the metaphor of a putting a new engine into a classic car. Not only do you get to keep the jewel you have grown to love, but it is going to run down the road with a hell of a lot more power and attitude.
Broncos RULE!!!!!!
by Broncos Rule on Apr 27, 2009 3:23 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
And depending on who you believe...
…he’s a big tough guy that can RUN. MTD doesn’t think so, NFL.com says he can. I am NOT (repeat NOT) making an Elways comparison. That would be foolish. But Elway was a tough guy that was could run. He could also throw a nasty block (though I HATED it when he did).
: )
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 6:28 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Elway and Tough
I recall a story that I believe I saw, heard, or viewed locally discussing Elway’s toughness. And, I believe it came from Elway himself. The circumstances, I recall, were around an interview being conducted and Elway showing things in his trophy case at his home in Denver.
As I recall, Elway has a Raider’s helmet on display. He says it came from Howie Long on the occassion of them playing together in an NFL All-Star game, I believe Howie’s last. The helmet was Long’s and it was signed (paraphrasing, since I have not seen it nor have a true memory any longer), “To the toughest Son of a B**** I have ever played against”.
I submit that speaks to his toughness that you reference….
by Broncos Rule on Apr 29, 2009 11:21 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
THANK YOU
Hoosierteacher this is almost exactly the spiel I gave my boss, a notorious fair weather Bronco fan. He insists I am ‘drinking the kool aid’, but I insist I can see what the Broncos are doing and when I mentioned to him that the Pats had used this same strategy to win three Super Bowls, well – he reminded me that the Pats in recent years have traded DOWN to hoard picks.
Yes, and you know why they can do that? Because they have over the years, drafted sensibly and can afford to fill the bottom of their roster with quality guys right now. They will be competitive for a long time to come.
And so, I think will Denver.
by TheMastermind on Apr 27, 2009 3:30 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
That's why they call you "The Mastermind" my friend.
Your boss sounds like my father in law. Thank God my FIL is a Bears fan.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 6:38 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
That'll make for quite the holiday season...
My roots are in Denver and my branches in Nebraska.
by Blackshirt4Broncos on Apr 27, 2009 11:44 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
It always does.
Believe me.
lol
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 28, 2009 8:04 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Moreno
I like how you brought up that he runs routes. That was the biggest thing that made my eyes go wide when reading about this kid. I have tried to explain it to people but I just don’t think people will get it until they see it.
This guy is going to CREATE mismatches all over the field for Denver.
Don't jump off the cliff but if the guys next to you are loud and annoying try to push them off.
by Kfustud on Apr 27, 2009 3:39 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I've heard of WRs that can't run routes,
but never a RB known for being able to run them. That little blurb blew my mind.
AFC West: be afraid. Be very, very afraid.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 6:40 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're right, HT
You’ve written even better series – but a a stand alone article, this is your best work, and I congratulate you for it.
A couple small notes. Several people have noticed that David Bruton was taken partly as a special team player. Our special teams were dead last in the league last year (distinctly un-special), and added to our extensive offensive and defensive woes. I have hopes for Barrett, but I love this pick. We need high quality competition to create a high quality team, and he will provide it at safety and still improve STs. I want the guys who lose out in TC to start for other teams. I want our people to be that good. We drafted a few people who are good to great on ST, and it’s about time.
I was concerned with the final pick last night. Most sites didn’t even have notes on him. Then I found out how he did at the Combine, his athleticism and skillset. I’m very impressed. Both he and Olsen, who is only growing on my slowly, can handle multiple positions. This would possibly indicate that ‘Steiger isn’t looked on with utter favor, or just mean that we will have some great competition and one very good guy on the PS – not at all a bad outcome.
The kool-aid line has grown foolish with overuse – it means that you like a team, which I think of as a given. But while a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, deeper looking into the reasons and purposes, as you did here, should sober it again – after which it can go out and tie another one on. That’s not unreasonable – this is a well written, well argued paper on the specific reasons it has for it to celebrate. Thank you.
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Apr 27, 2009 3:39 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Bear,
I consider it a rare privledge and an honor to have you as a friend. I would think that even if you hated my article, I just probably wouldn’t have written the sentiment down. lol
: )
You are right about the STs argument. Several other posters upthread have pointed out the idea of Bruton and STs, and it is a valid area that I ignored. I’m not high on the pick, but the reasoning makes sense. I buy your point more and more.
I LOVED our final pick at center, but am still not sold on Olsen. Am curious (with you) to see how Licks Ten Tigers does.
Thank you, good friend.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 6:48 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks HT
Very informative article and I enjoyed reading it. I love that it has created so much spirited discussion. Overall I believe it was a fair draft and filled slots that needed addressing for now the the future. But, just like every other teams choices the jury is out as to how well any of them perform. The Broncos choices appear to have a lot more up side than down IMO.
by bchiper on Apr 27, 2009 3:44 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I think that's a very fair and smart approach.
Ultimately, you are more right than those on either side of the debate. TIME will have the final say.
Good call bchiper!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 6:53 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bruton was described by PFW as the BEST special teams gunner in the draft.
I am an idiot walking a tightrope of fortune and fame
I am an acrobat swinging trapezes through circles of flame
If you've never stared off in the distance, then your life is a shame
and though I'll never forget your face,
sometimes i can't remember my name.
--Counting Crows, "Mrs. Potter's Lullaby"
by PredominantlyOrange on Apr 27, 2009 3:49 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Yep, I missed it.
Thank the heavens that MHR has the intelligent membership to catch my misses!
If I ever cross to the dark side (get paid), I’m hiring you to be my editor.
Thanks PO!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 6:55 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting, Glowing Report
You write some good things about the players Denver got. The other 31 teams got good players as well, and today their blogs have similar glowing reports. Every team is a winner the day after the draft.
It will be interesting to see how things jell in training camp and the season. Hope your enthusiasm is justified and we can all be happy Bronco fans.
by Baltimore Bronco on Apr 27, 2009 4:05 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
"Every team is a winner the day after the draft"
unless your team is from Oakland… LOL
Long Live (Undead) Al!
by Royal With Cheese on Apr 27, 2009 4:46 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree in part / dissent in part.
A lot of folks are happy the day after the draft; that is true. But fans are also furious on the day of the draft itself. It goes both ways.
In fairness, I felt good about the last (‘08) draft, but not great. I disliked most of the previous drafts. Even this draft didn’t garner anything I wanted. The difference is, it didn’t have to. This year I changed my perspective from “need” to “best”. In that light, the players don’t have to be what I want. They just have to be good. These players are. And I’m very content.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 7:03 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Outstanding HT
from the kid in the back of the class with the dunce cap I like this one. Kept me in the classroom the whole time!
Thank you sir
http://www.davusx.net/assets/db/la_la_land.gif
"We should have kept Seattle and dumped San Diego from the Division"
Davis and Sharpe to the Hall!
by Jon Tollerud on Apr 27, 2009 4:21 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
From the coach up front....
Get that $#)*&ed thing off of your head Tollerud!
Thank YOU sir.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 7:05 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Amazing post HT!
I have really been agreeing with everything you have said about our draft. I actually like all of our picks and I never doubted McDaniels and Xanders during the draft. Thank god we have you here!
"Really, I'm a high-motor guy. Tough, hard-nosed, a hard runner, can make you miss at times. And just competitive. I love to play the game and I bring that energy to my team. So, we'll see how that goes." - Knowshon Moreno
Knowshon Moreno is the boss!
by stedtfeld on Apr 27, 2009 4:22 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Thanks sted,
Ironic. I thank God that YOU’RE here. Would an article make a noise if no one was there to read it?
Thanks for being here.
(BTW, the oher day I was in a forest and a tree fell right in front of me. I didn’t hear a thing.) Yes, I stole that from Steve Wright.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 7:09 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Anyone want to post a response to
Jason Cole on Yahoo re his Broncos’ draft grade? If you disagree with him, and are feeling more articulate than I am at the moment, feel free to drop him a polite line.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/feedback;ylt=AoknXHDq0SDkZWCD66tPNbsYNAF?author=Jason+Cole
by underdog on Apr 27, 2009 4:24 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I just don’t have the time anymore. I mean this is getting old, its the same 1 dimensional analysis that we so often see out of the press.
Don't jump off the cliff but if the guys next to you are loud and annoying try to push them off.
by Kfustud on Apr 27, 2009 4:29 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have no desire to lend credibility to someone who has no credibility in my eyes.
Verbose in style, dispersion of thought, procrastination in life.
by Tim Lynch on Apr 27, 2009 4:30 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
HT, I'm blown away
What a pleasure to read. I liked some of our picks, but the 3 DB’s and 2 OL’s had me scratching my head. You give some great interpretations which may indeed give insight into McJedi’s plans. No one can know for sure, but I won’t disagree with any of the thoughts you have shared as I have no alternate hypothesis of this quality.
Go Broncos!
by Royal With Cheese on Apr 27, 2009 4:54 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm not hoping to pursuade anyone...
…but if I can at least outline the plan (as I see it), I hope that some folks will appreciate (understand) the strategy, even if they don’t buy into it.
Thanks for taking the time to read it. I appreciate it!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 7:14 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
so, are we rebuilding again, then?
i don’t think many people have a problem with the players selected themselves, for the most part. the bpa is debatable from analyst-analyst. also, if we took, say, a lt with the 12th pick, is that really for the betterment of the team? i think it’s the cost of moving up to get these players, combined with the need(which can’t be ignored, either), that has people confused. i’m still looking to stop the run, and then to rush the qb. we selected 1, out of, i believe, 13? total picks used to address these 2 areas. until we do that, i don’t see success on any level for this team. i’m surprised you now feel differently, especially as a former dc. we will be blown off the ball in the 3-4 this season as currently configured, in my opinion. i believe we could have easily, and cheaply, upgraded talent in these areas. traded down if they weren’t worth the pick(value-see n.e.). traded up, if only one player at a position was good enough, or a fit. one dt/nt would have a domino effect on the line, as you said yourself.
how many more fa periods and drafts are we looking at, now? sorry, but to me 1 pick out of 13? used in the front 7 is alarming, and an utter failure. you can draft bpa and address some needs in a draft. an absolute in either direction is not wise. you end up cutting good players at overstocked positions, for instance, wasting picks, while glaring needs still bring the team down. and i do not believe we are going to even address this next year, following this formula, we lost a good amount of ammo to do so. we gave up alot to pick the bpa(in mcd’s eyes), bringing in 27? players, and still have holes. that’s amazing to me. the ufa’s won’t save us, either. when, oh when? question: would you run a 3-4 base or 4-3, with the current players/picks we now have, for this season? we seem to be going zone in the secondary, please don’t tell me that doesn’t mean a bend-don’t-break style. please
taste my blintzkrieg!
2009-year of the secondary?
by davecheffy on Apr 27, 2009 4:54 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
i meant "that means" on the last line
a double-negative, silly me. 1 vote for the edit button.
taste my blintzkrieg!
2009-year of the secondary?
by davecheffy on Apr 27, 2009 6:54 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fair points all.
Here are the answers.
1) Yes, we are rebuilding. We will keep rebuiding until we reach critical mass (the Patriots). Then we will trade picks for the future.
2) We should (and will) go 3-4 right away.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 7:17 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I trust your judgment HT.
Frankly, I had trouble understanding what was going on. However, what you say makes sense. After all, isn’t New England where McDaniels learned most of what he knows about all areas of football, including the draft?
If this be Hell, let us make the most of it!
by Trinidad Jack on Apr 27, 2009 4:54 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I concur counsel.
And the case is submitted.
(Chief Justice exits…)
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 7:21 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
now we await the returns.
If this be Hell, let us make the most of it!
by Trinidad Jack on Apr 28, 2009 10:19 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey HT I love this draft but it has nothing to do with the talent of the players.
What I love that I saw is every single player is a high character guy. I’m glad we are changing the culture in Denver again. No more Travis Henrys. That in it’s self makes me excited for next season. Guys that we be proud of and cheer for with out reserve. Thanks for a great article.
by ThorpeBroncosfan on Apr 27, 2009 6:22 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
+1
The talent doesn’t hurt either, of course. ; )
"They need a hero to tell them that the impossible can become possible..... WHEN... YOU'RE... AWESOMMMME!" -- Rhino the Hamster
by broncosmontana on Apr 27, 2009 6:44 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's a big part of it.
Best player loses a lot of effectiveness if we get low character guys. I won’t miss the FA criminals we had over the last couple of years.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 7:23 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
HT you totally rock man
Terrific terrific breakdown. I read this covertly while at work today and was dying to comment and rec!! And now I must make dinner for the kids (being a Mr. Mom right now). ^^ But I’ll be back with my thoughts asap.
"They need a hero to tell them that the impossible can become possible..... WHEN... YOU'RE... AWESOMMMME!" -- Rhino the Hamster
by broncosmontana on Apr 27, 2009 6:44 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Remember...
MHR first, work second! lol
I can get arrested for loging in at work, so I’m kidding of course.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 7:25 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well Done!!
Your articles are always the best!
by broncobird on Apr 27, 2009 7:18 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
And you are always the best evaluator!
Thanks for making my day!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 7:25 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
wow!Incredible breakdown.All of a sudden,I feel pretty good about this draft,which wasn’t the case a couple of days ago.I feel much better knowing there is a plan and I’m excited to watch it all unfold.
by odoyle rules on Apr 27, 2009 7:20 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I should go into propaganda work!
We’ll see how the plan works out. I’m comforted knowing there IS a plan, and that it is a smart one.
At camp we’ll see how it pays off. This season is too tough of a test (schedule, new coach, new coordinators, new coach, etc), but next season will be a good measurement. I’ll be watching this camp more closely than ever.
Thanks o.r.!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 7:29 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Another great post Coach...
A true thank you for taking the time.
Sidenote: I loved the first round, but hated the trade for the Al Smith pick. Don’t get me wrong, I love what he brings to the team, but hate the fact we traded away our leverage for next year’s draft.
When I say “hate”, I mean more so than Broncoman and everyone else combined. Those two picks in next year’s 1st. were my insurance policy that guaranteed we could cover the cost of Taylor Mays’ draft price. (Or even Eric Berry who many will say is a better FS than TMays, but they’ll never convince me)
But after 10 full minutes of pouting, and a couple dozen cuss words, I came to terms with the trade, and had my game face back on before our next pick in the second round. Maybe I’m too optimistic, but those of us who see something great in next year’s draft, have to simply accept the fact that it’s out of our control, and the door is not closed. We can just as easily make a trade in next year’s draft, as we did in this year’s.
Taylor Mays in '10
by donbok1 on Apr 27, 2009 7:56 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I hear you.
If he’s the BPA, we’ll trade ’11 picks to get him in ’10. Just remember, someone will hate that trade too! lol
Thanks for the kind words, and allthe best to you Don.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 9:00 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I knew that was going to bother you Don
Moreno in 2009! - Check
Mays in 2010!
by Steve O' on Apr 27, 2009 10:05 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Loved the Article!!
it was a long one but worth it!! great job!! i just disagree and say that the best man we drafted is Ayers!! I truley belive after watching some tape he can play all positions and one year be defensive MVP!! (however he is not built enough for the DE just yer so i have him at OLB)!!
by BiGBaNnA on Apr 27, 2009 7:58 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I appreciate you taking the time to read it!
And if you are right and Ayers turns out to be the real beast of the draft, I’ll raise my glass to you first! Anyone who helps the team is fine in my book, and if it is Ayers then rock on!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 9:02 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Excellent post HT! Rec'd! You put a lot of effort into this for everyone's benefit.
A comment about the Fairbanks vs the Phillips systems: When Joe Collier was here, I heard the comment that it takes 2 training camps for a LB to learn the system. When Phillips took over, it appeared that guys contributed right away.
I remember the draft (’85 – I think) that brought Steve Sewell and Vance Johnson to us. The articles I read from the DP commented over and over that it was the character that mattered. That was in the Reeves era. This is as true today as it was then.
I like this draft. I didn’t when we weren’t drafting any NTs. When I realized that the only NT better than or on a par with our own guys was Raji, that feeling ameliorated. This was a heckuva draft in helping all 3 areas: O, D, ST.
by Blackknigh on Apr 27, 2009 8:08 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Neat point on the Collier - Phillips learning curve.
I never heard that nugget! Thanks for sharing it!
Good thoughts all, and thanks!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 9:08 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I gave the Draft a B
but this article an A+. I like the players, but not addressing the most glaring need on the team keeps it from being an A…although I understand the reasoning.
Have a good time all the time...that's my motto. - Viv Savage
by TD4HOF on Apr 27, 2009 8:23 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I like both grades!
Thanks!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 9:10 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I just want to have some of that kool-aide you guys are drinking...
We gave up to much….The players i’m fine with however the #1 next year bothers me even if Smith turns out to be Deion. The 2 3rd rounders for a blocking tight end that couldve been there in the 4th……To further my point i hear he wants to get rid of Moss…..I want to believe and hope i’m wrong…..???
by broncolb on Apr 27, 2009 8:56 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I avoid the kool-aid.
We have a group of fun loving guys that jokingly call themselves residents of “La LA Land”. I love them, but I’m not a resident. We also have the regular “angry as Hell” guys too (but they’re friendly and don’t bite). That’s not my gig either.
You’ll find that I have things I love (Bailey and Dawkins, my two all time favorite players are both now in Denver). You’ll find I have things I hate (our two coordinators from last year should be tarred and feathered). But on the draft, I think a lot of folks miss my point.
I didn’t love this draft per se. I understood it. When viewed for what it is, it makes perfect sense. When viewed through the prism of the simplistic (but common) “needs” approach, it doesn’t even make sense.
So a needs based person in trapped in the mindset of what we didn’t get this year (and even what we won’t get next year). He’ll never understand the different context, because he sees it in comparison to what we get or don’t (neither of which matters in a BPA approach).
To a needs based mindset, this wasn’t simply an awful draft, it was a mysterious draft without any sense. There is no context. But in a BPA context, the draft makes total sense (whether one agrees that it was a good draft or not). I didn’t care for much of our draft, even in the BPA context. But it makes sense to me, and the strategy was brilliant. The team is better for it. And in BPA thinking, that is much more important than anything else.
That’s the key. The team is going to improve, just not where you might want it to. When you lower the pool of lottery tickets (picks) to a certain subset (a certain position), you lower the chances at hitting on each pick that much more. A few drafts like this one (quality in every pick, regardless of position), and we’ll have the balance and advatages of other teams that go this route.
It makes the draft less exciting, but that’s another variable that shouldn’t concern is either.
(By the way, right now I’m drinking a mint – moose tracks shake. Sounds bad, but I swear its delic!)
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 27, 2009 9:30 PM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
When I read the Woodward was playing ILB, I realized that the coaches were evaluating all the players to put them in their strongest position.
This is great – having the best and most productive 4 LBs (or in the later downs packages – the best combination), for example, on the field at one time. Not based on past performance in one position but how they work best in the defensive scheme. I sense that this is taking place in the entire defense as well as the offense and ST.
When I lived in Portland, OR 16 yrs ago, I dropped a resume at NIKE in Beaverton. I was impressed with how they looked at their potential hirees. They didn’t put you in the “niche” of past performance and jobs that you had done – but they looked at how your skills and knowledge would contribute to the company as a whole. In other words, you could be doing a completely different job than you thought you were interviewing for. I never worked for them, but I was impressed by their innovation and openness to new ideas. I am seeing the same mindset applied to our Denver Broncos. This is really exciting.
by Blackknigh on Apr 27, 2009 11:40 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
i think the "needs" people weren't starting over, again
like myself. i am not prepared to start a 5-year rebuilding project, again. it simply isn’t necessary(though it’s beginning to be). the blame for this bewilderment probably lies with the coach, repeatedly telling fa’s, fans, and i’m sure bowlen, that we are going to try and “win now”, mcd’s quote, not mine or anyone elses. and quite frankly, draft-wise, this is getting old already. what we seek is balance. if there is no bpa or value(i’m sick of hearing this one, it was never higher at lb) next draft on defense, do we spend picks on offense mostly, again? draft the best safety? that makes this draft’s picks a waste, doesn’t it?
pure bpa is not a sound strategy, and at some point you have to address need. it is imperative that you do. if you are going with a need, then you target your players and move up. you don’t do that for bpa at any position, in my opinion. you don’t become a good team by drafting the same position over and over, either. most teams that draft bpa do it at one of several positions of need. again, i’ll use the clady example of drafting a LT this year, even if he was the bpa. why don’t you do that? because there is no need. it has to be more of a need. nobody drafts like that, and for good reason. it would result in team failure. in addition, the teams that are perceived as bpa teams(giants, steelers, pats,…) are already really good, for quite some time.
was big ben the bpa back when? not really, they drafted the bpa at a position of need. they now can afford more of this strategy, because they are more of a complete team, now. most teams typically start with a qb, and the lines. if you’re detroit, another receiver, probably the bpa. last season’s dolphins got it right. for us, the price of the picks used, where, plus the ignoring(and i do mean ignoring) of your greatest needs is just not a sound strategy. there were several ways to get both done, and we chose not to. that is where the problem is: high price, little value(lost picks and a reach or two), and real needs remain. 27 new players, and we under-valued problem areas #1 and 2 on defense. didn’t have to be this way, we had the ammo to address both needs and the future. we needed starters, not an entirely new team from the ground up. there has to be a better way. one more time: is this all really necessary? will it eventually work? let’s hope so. for now, let’s blitz like all hell ’til we get it right.
taste my blintzkrieg!
2009-year of the secondary?
by davecheffy on Apr 28, 2009 2:52 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Dave,
Just a couple of quick thoughts.
1) Nothing is an absolute. Teams (whether BPA or need) are going to blend somewhat. This is why your Clady and Big Ben examples are a little over the top. If you’re using an absolute as your basis, you’re falling into a fallacy (a dog has four legs, a pig has four legs, therefore a dog is a pig). No team is 100% one way to the exlusion of the other strategy.
2) BPA is a terrible strategy? Tell that to the current (and best) example. NE is a contender every year in a league designed for parity. They got there using BPA, and they stay there using BPA. INDY is another example (though they are probably going to decline without Dungy being there and keeping BPA in place). On the extreme other end of the spectrum is Oakland, who’s coach ignores the best players and says “I gotta have that guy! I want me some speed!”
You may also be ignoring another aspect of BPA. Let’s say you have Peyton Manning on the roster, but you draft John Elway. Stupid huh? But now you have trading leverage. (Look at what SD did. Brees to NO, they kept Rivers. All holes filled on the 3-4. Not bad).
A last point getting missed in the discussion. I’m not a BPA guy. That’s why the draft confused me at first. So I had to look at it through the eyes of BPA to see if it was a good draft. In that context, it was brilliant. If I graded a “need” team based on BPA standards, they would look dumb.
So here’s the problem. Some people want to judge our draft on needs standards. If you do that, there’s no argument. We’ll just keep going in circles. If you judge it fairly (judge it in the context that it was done in, which is BPA standards), then it was a terrific draft.
For example, you may be a great French author (say, a young Victor Hugo). I grade your paper in an English class. I give you an “F” because your paper was in French. Fine. But Dave, this is a French paper submitted in a French class, and you’re demanding that we grade it based on English standards.
That’s like saying the Broncos are a failure because they run a 3-4 and you want a 4-3. During the game you keep complaining that the team is missing a DL and has an extra LB on the field. We can argue all day about which formation is better, but the real debate should be “We just got a turnover! Isn’t that a good thing?” In a 3-4, we’re SUPPOSED to have only 3 DLs and have 4 LBs.
If we had a needs based draft, and we got who you wanted, I would grade the draft on a needs based system and say “Yay! we got who we wanted” instead of “Man, Need drafts are stupid. You just limited yourself to a certain position, regardless of how bad the player is”. What you are doing is attacking our draft on the premise that we didn’t get who you wanted. But that’s the point of a BPA! We don’t go after “who” we want, we go after what is best.
One last analogy. If you have a meal in mind, you go to the grocery store and by the ingredients for the meal you want. Congratulations! You got the meal you wanted (though the ingredients may or may not turn out to be the best).
But here’s how I grocery shop. I go to my local grocer, and buy only the best ingredients out there, regardless of meal. I’ve been doing this for years (and this is how most chefs approach shopping). Do I have the specific dinner I wanted? Maybe, maybe not. But I have several advatages that you don’t. I have only the best ingredients (you might or might not), and I have several meals to choose from.
This is what recently happened in NE. Brady got injured. But a QB who hadn’t played a down of football was able to step in without the team missing a beat. Why? Because he was surrounded by – the best players available.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 28, 2009 8:33 AM MDT up reply actions 4 recs
Rec'd comment
The grocery shopping example is a great way to show the differences between BPA and need drafting.
"If you don't know where your going you might find yourself somplace else."
by BroncoJoe87 on Apr 28, 2009 11:07 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Conflicting View
I enjoyed your article, HT, but must respectfully disagree a little on the substance and a little on the form..
You stated: "Denver scored on this draft in so many ways it would be difficult to make a credible case against it. "
My difficulty with this statement is that I believe it is possible to make a credible case against it and numerous football writers more talented than me have done so. Many have rated the Bronco draft in the B to C range. Some have gone lower.
I think after the free agent signings that the B grade is appropriate for this draft.
I understand the first round choices and think that most feel they were fair choices given the circumstances. I have no problem with an RB being chosen first. You draft for value.
My problem with the draft goes more towards reaching some in the 2nd round and also not addressing the meat-in-the-middle problem, which I think remains. Teams may still be able to run on us in the Fall.
I continue to argue that we need to get away from the Cutler controversy and move on towards the Fall, but we must also get away from our pro-and antt- new coach positions and try to become more balanced in our analysis of what is going on in Dove Valley. I think many of the people enamored with what McDaniels did in the draft would have been critical of Shanahan trading away a 1st round draft choice next year in the 2nd round of this year. Some would be saying that we are mortgaging the future and reducing our options to get a spectacular choice next year.
So, I enjoy reading the MHR analyses, but I do have hope that all sides of the Bronco Nation can move a little towards the middle in viewing the events at Bronco Nation. This is likely to be an eventful Fall for our Broncos and I hope we can all see the good, but also recognize the bad that may remain with the team. A common ground means that we can be balanced in our view of what they are doing.
by Baltimore Bronco on Apr 28, 2009 5:06 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Here's the form you might be seeking.
The reason (as fleshed out in the threads) that a lot of writers make a poor case against the draft is that they only view the draft in one context – needs based. The point of my article (I hope you caught it) was that this was not a needs based draft for Denver, and scoring it in a needs paradigm will create the illusion that this was a poor or average draft. Viewed in the context of best player available, this was a brilliant draft.
You don’t have to agree with the draft strategy, you just have to treat it in the context it was done in. (The Normandy Invasion was a military total victory – and a humanitarian disaster. If I argue the military case, and you argue the huminatarian case, that’s pointless. I conceed we didn’t fill needs, but that’s because we weren’t even trying to! At Normandy, we killed and lost thousands of lives. If you decry the loss of human life, fine. Just don’t call it a military failure).
I reject the notion (at least in my case) that I am playing to any kind of “pro or anti” position. I am neither a La LA Land optimist, nor a doom and gloom person. I just write my opinions and try to support them. I understand your appeal to reletivism, but I reject it. If I see something good (this draft), I write it. If I see something bad (our OC and DC last year) I write that too. And I do it with balance. I didn’t agree with each pick in this draft, and I wrote that also. In fact, I had to change from my own context (I’m a needs based viewer) so that I could fairly write about what the Broncos were trying to do. OF COURSE it makes no sense when viewed in a needs context. It isn’t supposed to!
I see plenty of good this year, and plenty of bad this year. I’ll write about both. And I think I’ll be balanced, but that shouldn’t stop me from drawing a conclusion. You bring up Cutler. I think he made a poor choice to demand a trade and refuse to answer calls. That’s a judgement, and I stand by it. On the other hand, I continue to believe he’s a pro bowl caliber QB, and believe that he was given bad advice by his agent to take advantage of an innocent action by the coach (listening to a deal that was rejected anyway). Homers can hate that I still admire Jay, and Gloomers can hate that I believe the coach did the right thing. That’s balance. But I can still lay out the facts and come to a conclusion that I believe the facts support.
I don’t recall how I voted, but I’m probably in good company with those sports writers. I would give us a B. (“F” based on need, “A” based on approach/strategy/execution, “B” based on help for the team overall. Remember, I’m going on the latter as my context, not the former.) One or two more drafts like this, and we’ll only have good players at all positions.
Just my opinion.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 28, 2009 9:19 AM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
If I might offer an analogy...
Mutual Funds are often classified as Value funds or Growth funds. The premise of value funds is to buy stocks trading at less than their intrinsic worth and hold them until they appreciate. Growth funds buy stocks that are experiencing current growth and are anticipated to continuing appreciating. Now if you look at any growth fund, even the best perfomring ones, through the lense of value investing you will consitently conclude that they are over-paying. Conversely if you look at a value fund through the lense of growth investing you would wonder why they are buying so many dogs. You have to evaluate grwoth funds through the lense of growth investing and value funds through the lense of value investing.
The draft is a similar animal. You can draft based on need or you can draft based on BPA. One is not inherantly supperior to the other. Smart needs based drafting can work just as well as BPA. But you have to evalaute a teams draft based on the strategy they are using. Otherwise you are really just debating BPA v. need.
What HT is saying, if I understand him, is that most of the pundits are evaluating Denver’s BPA approach through the lense of nedds based. What they are really saying is that they prefer needs based to BPA, but they never go on the explain why they think need is better. In fact, for my money they actually talk out of both sides of their mouth. Before the draft they will stress the importance of BPA then after the draft criticize teams for not taking a needs based approach.
by SlowWhiteGuy on Apr 28, 2009 11:21 AM MDT up reply actions 2 recs
A+ to you.
My mutual fund analogy is “buy low, buy high, but buy, buy, buy”.
We may not get our cake today, but we will retire with millions.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 28, 2009 11:46 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm beginning to see the light.
We have a short term solution, needs based, versus a long term solution, BPA. It may take a few years and a lot of discipline, but eventually we should be able to plug every hole and end up with a solid team every year.
If this be Hell, let us make the most of it!
by Trinidad Jack on Apr 28, 2009 12:27 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is exactly the approach.
I would give you an A+, but I see from the pic you’ve already graduated!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 28, 2009 6:45 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great post!
And I actually read every single post in the thread.
These boards show the intelligence of the Broncos’ fan base as well as the willingness to listen to both sides.
Bring on the season and let the “experts” (lower case e intended) be silenced!
A proud prognostication of 10-6 in 2009!!!
by Broncotodd on Apr 28, 2009 7:22 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Well said.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Apr 28, 2009 9:21 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
to try and clarify here
i wasn’t presuming this draft and the allottment of picks we had this year to be part of a 2 or 3-draft strategy for team balance. that’s fine. but the “win now” talk goes against this strategy, as does the cost for obtaining help at several stocked positions in lieu of helping a big problem area, in my opinion, and many. i used the clady/ben extremes to make a clear point you need to consider both, which i said. but i am reading all over the site about how we just need to draft the best player available at any position, without regard to need, and that this philosophy is genius. just seems wrong to me. teams also don’t typically trade up to get the bpa, it is who is available at their pick. these players were targeted and acquired using important assets, which doesn’t really fit the bpa or need model. isn’t it the bpa at your pick, normally? hence, available(or left available)?
if you move up, practically everyone is available, and you are usually targeting a certain position/positions(safety, not LT, for instance). why not include need to some degree, which to me, improves value, and the team. i also don’t believe we didn’t have the opportunity, or the players didn’t have the talent, to do more than drafting 1 pick in the front 7, out of(i’m still looking for the total) 13? picks used for the team this draft? for example, the best ilb prospects were available late and cheap, and i feel bpa, need, and value(cost-no picks) came together perfectly. why not take advantage of the situation, i asked myself. probably the bpa, certainly at their positions. this is where my confusion begins. where targeting and available meet, including sacrifice.
i have no doubt we selected some very good players, and i am again not knocking them as bad picks, in and of themselves. as you state, pure bpa is not a good idea. i agree. neither is pure need. again, i agree. it is my personal belief that we undervalued the need on the front-7, and run-stopping/pass-rushing issues that have haunted this team since i can remember. i am not looking at this draft in purely need terms, we got very good players at some spots. if you are saying that need wasn’t the point, and this draft should be viewed purely through a bpa lens, at a position where there is less need, more depth/talent, then i have to disagree with that strategy.
either absolute is dangerous, as i said earlier. it’s not specific players i wanted, just a more balanced team, which was achievable even from a bpa viewpoint, without a disregard for need. some of the types of players we chose has me scratching my head, also. fast wr(another slot guy, some say), a small 3-4 de(i thought they were supposed to be 300lbs., like other 3-4’s and our dt conversions) and a lineman without agile feet(i think we are phasing out the zb, myself, so i understand that one). but whatever, every player has questions at this point. in the context of this draft, i see a decidedly bpa approach with a limited # of players/ positions considered. i just can’t get past the fact we used this approach(trading up to get a bp at his position) at many positions, but not where it was needed most, and probably of better value/cost. again, in my opinion.
maybe next year or the year after we consider need some more, or decide to trade up and get the bp at a thinner/more uncertain position. but d-line developement is slow, so we’re looking at 3-4 years down the road for dividends. and i just see the same stop-gap approach/neglect shanny used while he was here, not wanting to sacrifice picks and $ on the line. that has me very concerned. several drafts of this nature can pay dividends, for sure. but is that the plan, to have a great defense/team in 2012? that is the context i was looking at, another dt and lb i just think would have done wonders for this season, and not hurt us in another area we could address next season, safety and te, for instance.
with depth/future players on tap for next year, with 2 additional(plus whatever else we get) picks to fill in the blanks, i thought we could easily go practically pure bpa next year, if we chose. i see the logic in this approach in the beginning of a rebuilding phase, but as with n.e., pitt., etc., they had the great d-line in place first, inside-out, if you will. just my preference, and i will continue to wait for the next trevor price/al wilson/richard seymour/ willy mcginest. but i have to ask after all these years: are they ever really coming? just one? think of it! bigger and tougher, right? i have to believe it when i see it, now. if we don’t stop the run well/pressure the passer well this season, and draft the same way next season, will you join me in confusion, anger, and disappointment? wait, i said that last year. i am truly alone. hope that explains my thoughts better, but i have to admit i’m a little mentally tangled this offseason, as i’m sure many of us are. i’ll feel better after we pound the raiders, i’m sure.
taste my blintzkrieg!
2009-year of the secondary?
by davecheffy on Apr 28, 2009 12:34 PM MDT reply actions 1 recs
for the record...
i favor the 3-4 base by a mile, providing we have the size/strength/talent/depth to be more than average at it. didn’t like it last season, though, or whatever that was. the best consistent defenses, mostly, run a 3-4(n.e., pitt., dallas, s.d., etc.) year after year. i just want to make the switch when we are ready for it, not because we want to do it. and that starts with a stud nt, and big, strong, multi-talented de’s, in my humble opinion. are we there, yet? that’s all i’m asking
taste my blintzkrieg!
2009-year of the secondary?
by davecheffy on Apr 28, 2009 12:44 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
my guess is we might do well with what we have
but it certainly isn’t something we should feel safe about, like with our Oline.
I will say that with the limits (roster and cap) that are placed on teams, there will always probably be some area of the team that is “at risk”. For us it was ideal 3-4 front 7 personnel, but I think in terms of risk strategy, it was the wisest choice to “go risky” with.
LBs are a glut of young talent adn experienced producers: boss, Dj, Woodyard, larsen, Davis. there are some veteran backups in the mix there as well. OLB/DE is a mix of talented conversion projects that would be unwise to sell short (DOOM has been proving everyone wrong about everything since he started playing ball, I simply won’t bet against him.) DE is a mix of athletic good fits for certain 3-4 styles, but no experienced classic 2-gappers, and NT/DT is a mix of athletic stout and relatively inexpereinced one-gappers.
IT looks to me like an attacking front seven. I think SlowWhiteGuy’s comments so far on this have been the most relevant and insightful: this isn’t a common 3-4 goup of players, and it shouldn’t be an attemtp to run a common 3-4. Any football formation is limited only by creativity and imagination, and Nolan is one of the best. I think we are all going to have to keep our eyes peeled and really help eachother once we start geting tape to watch of this defense, because I think they will be successful with this group of personnel, and I think everyone will want to know exactly why…. We all will ahve to learn some new tricks to appreciate it I think.
There is no army so powerful as an idea whose time has come.
by Jeremy Bolander on Apr 28, 2009 1:14 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thank you
I just found this website. Let me say, “Hallelujah!!!!” Finally, a discussion board with intelligent football fans that can TRULY discuss football without being belittled. The 9news and DP boards are just plain ridiculous. I look forward to spirited, but respectful, debate over the Bronco draft and the upcoming season. Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!
"The men who have done big things are those who are not afraid to attempt big things, who were not afraid to risk failure in order to gain success."
- B.C Forbes
by HSFBCoach on Apr 28, 2009 9:47 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Good to have you
Welcome
My Dad told me about the 4 seasons:
Pre-season
Regular-season
Post-season
Off-season
by KaptainKirk on Apr 29, 2009 5:22 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Glad that you've moved here, Coach
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on May 4, 2009 1:10 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Howdy
I echo HSFBCoachs’ thoughts, and say finally and thank goodness I found this site! I’m a Broncos fan stuck in Texas who is always looking for a place to talk with fellow fans who have some knowledge about football.
I have read this whole thread, and have to say thanks to HT for the great article. It made me feel anywhere from 3 to 46 times better about this draft. I am excited about the season again, and can actually think about the new regime without wanting to throw things around the room.
Couple things, what is rec’d? It’s been driving me nuts not knowing what it means reading this gigantic thread, haha.
Also, I assumed when Shanny was out and McD was in, that we would abandon the zone-blocking scheme and convert to a spread. I’m sure one of you smart guys can help me out here, is it something we are going to convert over time or are we going to run a spread with a zone scheme? Has that even been done before?
Again, I’m glad I found you guys!
by aLuffabo on Apr 30, 2009 11:33 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Rec'd means
At the end of the article are a list of choices – email, print, Flag, Rec. Hitting the ‘rec’ gives thae article a personal recommendation. The authors always appreciate it when other members choose to give their articles some extra support. There is also a ‘Buzz’ button at the top of the article and to the right. clicking on it will give Yahoo a reason to move it higher on the seach engine so that more folks can enjoy the Mile Hi Report.
Glad that you found us – Welcome!
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on May 4, 2009 1:14 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 





































