Shallow Thoughts & Nearsighted Observations
Happy Tuesday to all MHR community members. I've been absent for a few weeks, mostly due to craziness in my day job, but at least partially due to a lack of awe-inspiring topics to write about. This is the worst part of the football year, where nothing is going on.
Today, we'll talk about the other teams the Broncos play this season, including AFC second-place teams and the AFC West, and time permitting, I kind of feel like beating up on some MSM writing. We shall see how far I am able to get, and for now, I am going to get right to it. Ready.... BEGIN!!!
1. As promised, let's continue the around-the-league offseason evaluations...
a. Indianapolis Colts (2008 Record 12-4, Lost in Wild Card Round of Playoffs)
Smart Personnel Moves - I really liked the selection of Donald Brown, the RB from UConn. Joseph Addai is a nice player when you keep his carries down, but Brown is a workhorse kind of back. I expect that he will ultimately get 2/3 of the carries for the Colts, with Addai getting the other 1/3. Running the ball effectively is crucial for the Colts, because when the defense has to play the run, Peyton Manning just shreds secondaries. He is very good against dedicated pass coverage, but he is great against 8 in the box. I also liked the pick of Austin Collie, a WR from BYU. He has a really good feel for the passing game, and can be a good slot player in the NFL.
Questionable Personnel Moves - I get that the Colts have a minimalist strategy in free agency, but I think that they are going to regret not doing more to replace Marvin Harrison. Reggie Wayne has really been the #1 guy the past few years, but Anthony Gonzalez is below average for a #2, and should be playing in the slot. If any team should have signed Terrell Owens, it's the Colts. Peyton Manning is one QB he couldn't ever throw under the bus, and the Colts have the kind of program he would have a hard time poisoning.
ST&NO Outlook - I have some reason to think that the Colts are going to decline a little bit this season. There has been a lot of turnover on the coaching staff, and I don't see how you could have a lot of faith in Jim Caldwell, given his underwhelming tenure as a head coach at Wake Forest. I also think #2 WR and the right side of the O-Line are going to be weaknesses, and that the defense will continue to be vulnerable to the run. Despite this, the Colts will be in the playoff mix, as usual. They'll be good, but not elite.
b. New England Patriots (2008 Record 11-5, Missed Playoffs)
Smart Personnel Decisions - I really liked their first three second-round picks, Patrick Chung, Ron Brace, and Darius Butler. Chung and Butler have a chance to start as rookies, and Brace should play a lot in the D-Line rotation. I also loved the Fred Taylor signing. I expect him to lead the team in carries this season, and play well. He still has some good football in him. Joey Galloway was also worth a look, and according to PFW, he has looked good so far. It was a pretty nice offseason for the Pats, if you overlook their obviously huge errors in valuing cheaper second-round picks over more expensive first-rounders.
Questionable Personnel Decisions - It's a somewhat small complaint, but they could have done more to improve their highly overrated and underwhelming offensive line. You may not remember it amid the 41-7 shellacking the Broncos took from the Pats last season, but the Broncos sacked Matt Cassell 6 times in the game, by far their best performance of the season.
ST&NO Outlook - I've been saying since Tom Brady got hurt that it's no sure thing that he comes back as good as new. I definitely stand by that, and I could care less what they say about it in Foxboro. Carson Palmer looked great in practice once too, but he has never been the same player since his catastrophic knee injury, and Brady's was comparable. Assuming Brady is healthy, and can play at 90% of his old level (or better), the Patriots are a championship contender once again. If not, they could be a .500 team, because they really got lucky that Matt Cassel played so well last season.
c. San Diego Chargers - (2008 Record 8-8, Lost in Divisional Playoffs)
Smart Personnel Decisions - I somewhat liked the Larry English pick in the first round of the draft. He is another pass rusher, and you can never have too many of them. Picking Dominique Byrd in the 7th round has some potential upside too.
Questionable Personnel Decisions - A lot of their draft picks are really obscure, and they seemed to like them better than most other teams. The right side of the Chargers offensive line isn't very good, and they could have stood to improve quite a bit there. Also, their average IQ is pretty low, according to the screenshot below from the super-reliable ESPN.com. Really, 83 is shockingly low, when you think about it. 
ST&NO Outlook - The Chargers are the favorite to win the AFC West, but they won't necessarily get it done. I can't put my finger on what it exactly is, but they have a real underachiever streak. Their talent is also downgraded a bit from last season, and for the second year in a row, they didn't do a lot to improve in the draft. The Chargers will be formidable, but they are flawed, and can be beaten.
d. Kansas City Chiefs - (2008 Record 2-14, Missed Playoffs)
Smart Personnel Decisions - I like Tyson Jackson a lot as a player, and I am not one of these guys who worries too much about draft slot. The Chiefs got a very good player for their defensive line, and that's a smart decision. I also liked the choices of Donald Washington and Ryan Succop, and the acquisition by trade of Mike Vrabel.
Questionable Personnel Decisions - I'm not too big on the Matt Cassel trade. Josh McDaniels obviously thought highly of him, but I just wonder if he can be as effective without all the playmakers around him. I am not saying it was a bad move, but it's no slam dunk as a good one either. I also think Larry Johnson should have been traded, and Tony Gonzalez shouldn't have been.
ST&NO Outlook - If Glenn Dorsey and Tyson Jackson play well on the defensive line, and Tamba Hali can get some pressure this year, the Chiefs have a 7-win ceiling. I expect their defense will still be terrible, though, and that they'll win 4 or 5 games instead.
e. Oakland Raiders - (2008 Record 5-11, Missed Playoffs)
Smart Personnel Decisions - This is the most difficult task of any team review, because even when the Raiders do something semi-smart (like sign a solid backup QB, as a hedge against a JaMarcus Russell regression or stagnation), it's always kind of dumb if you look at it a different way (Jeff Garcia is a well-known me-first guy, who isn't too interested in actually being a backup). I will give them credit for drafting Matt Shaugnessy, who I like as a player, and not just because he went to my alma mater, Norwich Free Academy of Norwich, CT. I think Shaughnessy fits the Raiders' 4-3 scheme very well, and that he will overperform his draft slot.
Questionable Personnel Decisions - The Raiders will regret taking Darrius Heyward-Bey seventh overall. I said before I am not such a draft slot guy, but when you pass up Michael Crabtree (or Percy Harvin, or Jeremy Maclin) for a guy, he'd better be a star - and DHB isn't going to be one. Also, counting on Khalif Barnes at LT is a mistake. He's a below-average starter there, even if he is a marginal upgrade over Kwame Harris.
ST&NO Outlook - The Raiders have some talent, especially at RB, LB, and LCB. If they commit to pounding the ball in the running game, and they get their defense patched up a bit, and playing sounder, this can actually be an 8-8 team. I think Garcia ends up starting by mid-season, which would be disastrous for the Raiders, (hence the reason I think it will happen). In short, I would hate to be a Raiders fan, and have to secretly hope for Al Davis's death and/or retirement.
2. Did you see this nonsense foxsports.com did around the 10 best "franchise players" under 30? Len Pasquarelli made it worse here with the continued omission of Ryan Clady, and the inclusion of Jordan Gross instead. Gross is good, but he isn't one of the 5 best LTs in the game (Clady, Thomas, Roos, W. Jones, Peters), let alone the best. All of those 5 are under 30, except for Walter Jones, too. I am not a Len Pasquarelli fan, so I don't expect any better, but come on!!! You don't have to be a stats producer to be a franchise player.
3. I think that Ed Thompson is kind of stupid, from what I have read of his 7 Points column. NYC originally made this point, but it bears repeating how asinine it is to say that the Broncos are paying Dre' Bly anything this season, since they're not. Many people don't know this, but in the NFL, unlike all the other major sports, there are no guaranteed annual contracts. The Broncos paid Dre' some bonus money in the past, but they'll pay him nothing this season. The dead money is merely an acceleration of the prorated bonus, so anything Dre' does this year is not "literally at Denver's expense." Next time you see this sort of (il)logical construct, you'll be able to spot it for what it is right away. This is not at all like the Tigers paying Gary Sheffield to play well for the Mets.
4. Here's an asinine comment from John Clayton. It seems that the Texans were lucky that their owner Bob McNair was afraid Reggie Bush received extra benefits at USC, and that stroke of luck led them to draft Mario Williams, because, nobody knew he'd be this good, right?
I mean, hell, he might have been declared ineligible by the NCAA to play in the NFL, right? What Clayton means is, he and his brethren all had that one wrong, and Charley Casserly and Gary Kubiak got it right. They all eviscerated the pick at the time, and said it was just Houston being cheap. Right....because paying $30 million in guarantees for a part-time scat-back, who is banged-up a lot, is brilliant. Even after one season, Houston was getting ripped, as if the jury was in.
The Texans drafted the player they thought was the best, and the one who filled their biggest need. It turns out, Williams seems to have actually been the best player, and it's important to remember, it was more good evaluation than good luck.
Have a great week, and I think this Tuesday debut will be the start of a total shift to Tuesday mornings for ST&NO, since I was planning to make that move anyway once the season starts. As always, thanks for reading, and for your contributions in the comments.
9 recs |
93 comments
|
Comments
super thumbnail sketches
thanks tb
rec’d
Pray for the best, prepare for the worst, and know you will come down somewhere between the two.
Livin' in La La Land and Lovin' It
by BShrout on Jun 30, 2009 7:27 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Impressive takes as always!
I’m an avid reader of ST&NA up here in the Colorado Rockies. I really respect your opinions. Since the Chargers were 8-8, when you suggest the Chefs might win up to 7 and the Faders up to 8, I get a bit worried the Broncos may incur the ignominy of finishing in the cellar. In the past few years the Faders and Chefs were not competitive teams.
The most fascinating part was the Chargers average IQ. It is said Low IQ has a moderately strong correlation to occupational failure and criminal incidents, but like most things about IQ, these conclusions are hotly debated. Will see if it is valid.
"Kool-Aid Kool Aid, Tastes Great, We Want Kool Aid, Can't Wait" -- Kool-Aid Man
by littletinybroncos on Jun 30, 2009 7:40 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
damn
never seen such a loopsided poll
HILLIS
by robbo650 on Jun 30, 2009 7:48 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I think the poll is more hype than fact...
I expect Tenn to be tough and physical this year while I expect a slump from Indy. Whether NE is tougher than Miami is completely dependent on how well Brady plays. I’d call it a tossup personally.
by SlowWhiteGuy on Jun 30, 2009 11:47 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I kind of think it is a toss-up too....
which is why it struck me as an interesting poll question. I’m a ltitle surprised to see it running so lopsided.
"I am not one of those who think that coming in second or third is winning." -- Robert F. Kennedy
by Ted Bartlett on Jun 30, 2009 11:48 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe could have added a
“it’s a tossup” choice? That’d get my vote. Would keep it from getting too “loopsided.” ;-)
by underdog on Jun 30, 2009 4:33 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
speaking as an ex-pollster
I think most of these polls are absurd.
"If people define situations as real, they are real in their consequences". W. I. Thomas
by Colinski on Jun 30, 2009 8:00 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Polls
My opinion exactly, though a little surprised to hear it from the consummate mathematician on the site.
My experience of polls in general are that the voluntary ones bring out the dissatisfied and the involuntary ones evoke dissatisfaction. Most polls are skewed by the question and skewered by the answers.
by Endzone on Jun 30, 2009 8:10 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wasn't even talking about Ted's question
Sorry about that! I really did mean “most of the polls.” I’ve almost gotten to the point where I routinely ignore them, because 90% of the time I’d have to honestly say that “none of the above” is the best answer. It’s a pet peeve of mine — I’d like to have a range of answers that reflects the range of real responses to a question. I’d don’t mind a little humor but I’d like to see actual information gathering a little more often.
They’re entertaining, and I don’t expect them to be more than that.
"If people define situations as real, they are real in their consequences". W. I. Thomas
by Colinski on Jun 30, 2009 10:57 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for The Thoughts and Observations
I like how your opinions on the teams moves are always a bit different from what’s out there and it gets me thinking a bit about my own evaluations of players and whether I agree or disagree with you.
by studbucket on Jun 30, 2009 7:59 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I still think the The Coach is a fool, but.
The poll is lopsided, but I don’t see much difference between an away game at Tenn vs an away game at Indy. The Broncos would be heavy underdogs either way and San Diego somehow owns Indy. I don’t think Denver is worse off having to play at Indy than San Diego is having to play at Tenn. Both away teams will likely lose those games. As for coaching, Tenn has a much better staff than the revamped group in Indy.
The Pats would appear to be better than the Dolphins, but Denver almost always loses to Miami and we have pretty good success against the Pats.
by McGeorge on Jun 30, 2009 8:04 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
How Hard Is It?
Why on Earth do you have to go out of your way to talk shit about McDaniels when your comment has nothing to do with it? Did he sleep with your girlfriend or something???
"A player who conjugates a verb in the first person singular cannot be part of the squad, he has to conjugate the verb in the first person plural. We. We want to conquer. We are going to conquer. Using the word 'I' when you're in a group makes things complicated." ~ Wanderley Luxemburgo, 1999
by ejruiz on Jun 30, 2009 11:48 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
And why do you take such offense?
It’s simply one of his opinions among others and doesn’t deserve either profanity or cheap shot. The juy’s very much still out on everything at this point – relax!
It's "just" football
by Donkhead on Jun 30, 2009 1:19 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
No.
The Rules of Conduct of this site, which have now been highlighted twice in frontpage posts, state that – and I’m paraphrasing here – ad hominem attacks (name-calling, if you will) in the direction of any member of the Broncos organization are forbidden. This was in response to the dust-up following the Cutler fiasco. This point has been brought to McGeorge’s attention many times and the guy refuses to abide. You’re right, though; I should have just flagged his comment.
"A player who conjugates a verb in the first person singular cannot be part of the squad, he has to conjugate the verb in the first person plural. We. We want to conquer. We are going to conquer. Using the word 'I' when you're in a group makes things complicated." ~ Wanderley Luxemburgo, 1999
by ejruiz on Jun 30, 2009 6:19 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
dry those tears
I don’t think The Coach slept with my girlfriend? The Coach is married and besides, I’m much better looking.
Until The Coach wins me over by winning more games than he loses (over a season), I’ll consider him a fool based on his several, as Pat Bowlen calls them, “rookie mistakes”. I guess I’m not as easily seduced as you EJ.
by McGeorge on Jun 30, 2009 3:06 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
McGeorge, read the Rules of Conduct, will you?
If you want to call folks names, go back onto the DP threads where you’re in good company
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Jun 30, 2009 3:25 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
both ejruiz and McGeorge should back off.
It’s getting personal and there is no point for this conversation.
There just isn’t any point to this type of dialogue when a single game has yet to be played.
Verbose in style, dispersion of thought, procrastination in life.
by Tim Lynch on Jun 30, 2009 3:46 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
No Worries.
I’m done taking him seriously. I’ve given him every chance because I thought he had some interesting points to make, but he has simply refused to follow even the simplest directions as to how to behave on this site. I thought we stamped out this whole McDaniels-name-calling and I was just trying to nip this in the bud. I may have overracted and I’ll take responsibility for that, but I’m just tired of him. I guess I’ll just have to ignore him from now on and let others deal with or placate him as they wish.
"A player who conjugates a verb in the first person singular cannot be part of the squad, he has to conjugate the verb in the first person plural. We. We want to conquer. We are going to conquer. Using the word 'I' when you're in a group makes things complicated." ~ Wanderley Luxemburgo, 1999
by ejruiz on Jun 30, 2009 6:23 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sweet.
It’d be awesome if people would reserve judgement until games are played.
"A player who conjugates a verb in the first person singular cannot be part of the squad, he has to conjugate the verb in the first person plural. We. We want to conquer. We are going to conquer. Using the word 'I' when you're in a group makes things complicated." ~ Wanderley Luxemburgo, 1999
by ejruiz on Jun 30, 2009 3:44 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Casserly deserves the cred for Mario
because he had the huevos to pull the trigger.
"You give 100 percent in the first half of the game, and if that isn't enough, in the second half you give what's left." – Yogi Berra
"No, I'm from Iowa, I only work in outer space."
by KaptainKirk on Jun 30, 2009 8:12 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
He looks like an owl, but gets read by millions and paid them too.
From the same article: Q from Ryan in New York: Is it possible Denver’s offense can score more in 2009 than in 08’? I do not think the passing game will be as good, but I also think it doesn’t have to be. The running game will be great with the experienced Correll Buckhalter, the dynamic Knowshon Moreno and the power of Peyton Hillis. From Ryan in New York
John Clayton’s response – It is possible the Broncos could end up scoring more than 23.1 points a game, but this has to be put in context. The defense gave up 28 points a game last year. Jay Cutler won three games in which he overcame a defense that surrendered 30 or more points. The Broncos have to be prepared for shootouts if the defense is suspect again, and I think that could be the case. I’m concerned about the run defense. The three-man line is patched together with castoffs from other teams, and there isn’t a nose tackle who draws the double-team block. If opposing teams run the ball 30-plus times with success, the Broncos’ offense might not get the ball enough to score 23. Yes, the Broncos can score a few more points, but it might not translate into more wins if the defense isn’t right.
Sad, but likely true.
by McGeorge on Jun 30, 2009 8:18 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Interesting,
However, even as I wait to see how this unfolds, Clayton doesn’t take into consideration the difference in the D coaching staff.. He seems to base his comments in past performance. This is not the same D; different coaches, different players and a different scheme. The Broncos now have one of the better D staffs in football IMHO. Now don’t get me wrong there are certainly questions about how the line will respond and subsequently perform. But, this should be an improved defense that should be able to hold it’s own. I believe the potential is there to be ranked in the middle of the pack, a marked improvement. That isn’t based on anything other than what the coaching experience brought in brings to the table.
by bchiper on Jun 30, 2009 8:56 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
We really aren't sure...
What the Defensive coaches are bringing to the table yet, nor have we seen how effective they are at communicating their scheme and habits. All the stories I’ve seen so far have focused on what McD does during practice, how he has altered the ways the QBs go about their business. I have heard nothing about what the defensive coaches are doing to improve the players that they have, and I also haven’t heard from anyone on the DLine about how they’re grasping the system, what they think of the coaches. The situation involving the DLine is really just a giant unknown, so I can understand why Clayton would be concerned about it. New scheme, new players, new coaches, and no new information. I have to admit I’m pretty worried about it…
by gOOn on Jun 30, 2009 4:33 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
New staff
has a pretty good track record is all I’m saying. And good coaching can make a huge difference. I concerned, but, not worried.
by bchiper on Jun 30, 2009 4:59 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
We're going to have to establish a "worry" guide...
“going to have a meltdown”>>"worried">> concerned>>"a little nervous">>"OK">>"cautious">>"slightly optimistic">>"kick butt">>"13-3"
:)
by gOOn on Jul 1, 2009 2:40 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Defense Suspects
Clayton is right to question our Defense. But he is wrong to focus entirely on the D-line and run defense. We vastly improved our D coaches and secondary. I thought our biggest problem last year was not the D-Line but our secondary play and coaching. We also have Carlton Powell and CFA’s such as Chris Baker. How does he know Fields, the only FA to play the NT position, won’t draw (or demand) the double-team? Nolan apparently likes Fields enough to lure him from Nolan’s former team.
by Endzone on Jun 30, 2009 9:24 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Big Picture
If you take the big picture though of what Clayton is saying is that our defense will be the same and our offense score more points but be worse and overall we will be worse.
So (Same Defense) + (More Points on Offense) = (Worse Team) which I don’t think adds up.
Tis better not to throw it to the deep receiver but the open receiver.
by Kfustud on Jun 30, 2009 10:04 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
It might if you consider the schedule
Which of course is based on last year’s record – but what else do you have to go by?
It's "just" football
by Donkhead on Jun 30, 2009 1:23 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well I am saying
“Worse Team” not “Worse Record”
Tis better not to throw it to the deep receiver but the open receiver.
by Kfustud on Jul 1, 2009 11:08 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
interesting
…that when the Bills sign a free agent, he gets a reality TV show and 24/7 ESPN coverage. When the Broncos sign a free agent — as they did with Fields — they are “patching together” their defensive line with “castoffs.”
Fields was a FA signing. As was Reid. Powell, Thomas, and Peterson were already here.
No talk of how Green Bay is “patching” together their front 7 with a rookie and an out of position DE — because Green Bay took one of the sexy draft picks in Raji that ESPN pushed.
Figuring out their positions on things is easy once you’ve figured out the calculus.
by JeffG on Jun 30, 2009 2:00 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's all in the language
Talented veteran? over the hill
Unrestricted free agent? His last team wouldn’t have him
Fourth round draft pick? Borderline pickup
Best RB in the draft? Desperate reach
Most explosive NT on the 49ers? Either the Steal of the Year, as one national commentator called him, or a “cast-off.”
Never mind their production or skill, for heaven’s sake. That would get into facts. On the draft – We probably would have taken Raji had he fallen, but I have to admit – Ayers is being looked at as what we need, rather than what some of us wanted. Moreno could raise the bar for our running game for a decade. Smith will start at nickel unless Bell or Williams really stands out. Those are the things that you want from your first 3 picks. for that matter, you’ll see a lot of McBath and Quinn this year, and Bruton should start on special teams, along with Smith and probably McBath. McKinley is a 5th round pick for a reason, but still – if he was the best WR that Steve Spurrier ever coached (as Spurrier said), then it’s at least decent odds that he makes the team and backs up Stokes at the slot. If just those players do well, it was a very good draft.
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Jun 30, 2009 3:36 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nor are they lambasting the Chiefs
for playing Glenn Dorsey completely out of positon at NT as well as Tamba Hali. Neither of which are good fits in the 3-4, by any stretch of the imagination. Dorsey might at least have success at 3-4 DE, but NT is completely contrary to the skills that he has shown in the past. At least Fields has experience at NT and DE in a 3-4.
Hey it’s just easier to kick the team that’s down and who they have convinced their readers is down, than pick up a new original thought. It’s a regular ole’ hate fest. And I love it. More doubters please. :-)
"You can make mistakes, but you are not a failure until you blame others for those mistakes." -John Wooden
by Randall15 on Jul 1, 2009 2:19 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Chargers' IQ!
ROFL! Great to have you (and your ST&NO) back, Ted!
Go Broncos!
by Royal With Cheese on Jun 30, 2009 8:19 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Fox
I noticed on the link provided by Ted (Ed Thompson – 7 points column) that Schein has chipped in again, gushing about the Bears. He calls them a SuperBowl worthy team because of the QB. What struck me the most was that he wrote that the QB will make the WR’s better in Chicago than their previous QB did. It looks like he is buying Cutlers line that he made Marshall and Royal who they are hook, line and sinker.
I’d just like to point out that the Chicago defense was ranked about the same as ours last year, and Cutler had more talent offensively here than he does in Chicago, and he couldn’t take the Broncos to the playoffs by winning just one game down the stretch. I just don’t see how he’s going to magically transform the Bears into a SuperBowl contender. I’m now on the record, please come back to me in January and I will eat the necessary crow should I prove to be wrong. I’m sure that Shein wouldn’t admit to being wrong in January.
by solace on Jun 30, 2009 8:24 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
dola
I’d also just like to say that I thought the Texans were smart to draft Williams (at the time). The numbers say that the average life span of a RB is about four years and I believe defensive linemen are up around 7, so just from an economics perspective it seemed to make sense to me. Also, he’s a fast, nifty type of back, who is an awesome change of pace guy, but I didn’t see him as an every down back which is what you would want from the first or second pick in the draft.
Not that I’m trying to pat myself on the back, I just wanted to point out that thinking people are not always swayed by the MSM and I hadn’t even heard of MHR at that time. :)
by solace on Jun 30, 2009 8:30 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
The NFC is a toss up
The Bears could have made the SB in 08, if the defense doesn’t choke and blow three late 4th quarter leads. There’s no way the Cardinals come into Soldier Field and defeat Orton and the Bears last year. In 2009, providing the defense is capable of playing Bears’ football, we will have a good shot go deep into the playoffs. The NFC has no dominant teams.
by rocko1 on Jun 30, 2009 8:33 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmmm...
I don’t know about that. It’s certainly fairly open, but you’ll probably find that the Giants and Eagles are favored by most.
"A player who conjugates a verb in the first person singular cannot be part of the squad, he has to conjugate the verb in the first person plural. We. We want to conquer. We are going to conquer. Using the word 'I' when you're in a group makes things complicated." ~ Wanderley Luxemburgo, 1999
by ejruiz on Jun 30, 2009 8:47 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Da Bears
Broncos fans have become better acquainted with the Bears this year for obvious reasons. Cutler is talented but undisciplined, Orlando Pace may be past his prime, I like the Iglesias pick for WR and have heard good things about Kinder and Knox, Forte is a proven back and Hester is a dominating kick returner but will never be a great receiver. Did I mention anything on the defense? No. The humbling and sad truth is that the Bears’ defense is not what it once was. As you said, they choked last year.
So, respectfully I disagree rocko1. The Bears did not really address their defense, although Jarron Gilbert looks pretty good. They seemed intent on protecting their new toy by hiring Pace.
Draft: 3rd Round: Jarron Gilbert – DT San Jose State 3rd Round: Juaquin Iglesias – WR Oklahoma 4th Round: Henry Melton – DE Texas 4th Round: D.J. Moore – CB Vanderbilt 5th Round: Johnny Knox – WR Abilene Christian 5th Round: Marcus Freeman – OLB Ohio State 6th Round: Al Afalava – S Oregon State 7th Round: Lance Louis – OG San Diego State 7th Round: Derek Kinder – WR Pittsburgh. You picked up some interesting UDFA’s and a few veteran FA’s, including Pace. The bottom line, to me, is that your draft was Jay Cutler.
There are other great teams in the NFC, including the Giants, Panthers and the Eagles. The Cardinals, Falcolns etc. I know it’s too early to intelligently predict, but emotionally I’d say the Bears will be in the middle of the NFC.
As an outsider looking in, I can’t agree with you. But kudos on believing in your team!
by Endzone on Jun 30, 2009 9:16 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
EZ
I’m not disagreeing, but just asking a question here. The Bears did pick up a DE, a DT, CB, OLB (I like Freeman, but that’s a different chat) and a S. As I count it, that’s addressing every level of the defense and multiple DL players. I sort of see that as trying to build the D. The DL players will take a while, a few years, but still – it was a defense heavy draft, yes?
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Jun 30, 2009 10:23 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bears D
Agreed numerically but not sure I agree qualitatively. I was not aware, though, of the coaching staff changes addressed by rocko1 below. I have more hope for da bears’ D than before.
In many respects I view the last few years’ Bears defense like the Broncos offense. Living on their reputations. They just were not as good in reality as the public perception.
In my best case scenario for the Bears, I see them winning their division but not winning their first playoff game. But the season hasn’t even started yet so it’s all crystal ball voodoo prediction right now.
by Endzone on Jul 1, 2009 9:36 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Defense needs to return to the top 10
A healthy and dominating Tommie Harris changes everything on the DL. Linebackers are a solid unit. Defensive backfield should be stronger on the corners, but safety is a question mark. The entire defensive coaching staff has been upgraded and Smith is now the DC which will help eliminate the 4th quarter meltdowns. Bob Babich was a disaster last year and in 2007.
Cutler will be as good as Orton, nothing more imo. Receivers are a question mark. I still believe the Bears pickup a quality WR via a trade or FA before the opener in Green Bay. I’m not impressed with Orlando Pace. He’s had a problem staying healthy and his better days are in the past.
Hester, as a kick returner, had a horrible year in 08. He’s been replaced by Manning for
kickoffs and I don’t expect much on punt returns. Hester wants to be a top receiver, and management doesn’t have the balls to say no. Our special teams will still be very strong as usual.
the Bears have issues, but so does every team in the NFC North. I just don’t see a great team in the NFC for 09. Considering the Bears’ schedule, I’m projecting 11-5 and the playoffs. That’s only if the defense returns to form. We still do have some pretty good defensive football players afterall.
by rocko1 on Jul 1, 2009 5:14 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you guys would be better served in the short and long term
by just putting Chris Williams at LT from the beginning.
I mean Pace is almost guaranteed to get injured again, so he’ll be there eventually. But getting him the experience and raise his comfort level at LT early could really be beneficial.
And the Bears management is probably smart to not say no to Hester. Don’t wanna lose your best offensive weapon, at least when he’s returning kicks. Gotta keep him happy so he’ll continue to get his points there.
"You can make mistakes, but you are not a failure until you blame others for those mistakes." -John Wooden
by Randall15 on Jul 1, 2009 2:25 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Williams back injury made his development a question mark
i think that ripening him at RT is probably a good move, but he shows signs of making it as a LT after Pace goes down
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Jul 1, 2009 5:07 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Points?
Hester didn’t score any points last year on returns Randall, and that was the point I was trying to make. In 2006/2007, Hester was the arguably the greatest kick returner in the history of the NFL. In 2008, after a contract upgrade, he was a below average #1 receiver and a below average kick returner. The Bears’ coaching staff and management in their collective wisdom figured the more touches Hester gets, the better he will be. They figured wrong. Imo, based upon what I see on returns, Hester wants nothing to do with returns anymore.
by rocko1 on Jul 1, 2009 6:23 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's important, rocko
There are almost no return specialists who stay good after an attempt to move them into the lineup as a WR. It doesn’t work, and the less that it happens the better
The difference with a man like Royal is that he came into the league NFL ready, skilled at running routes (Hester is still sloppy getting out of his breaks) and qualified to be a receiver. He hasn’t set the world on fire as a returner, but he’s very good and a great WR. It’s moving a specialist from the return game to a different role that nearly always – and I can’t think of an example when it hasn’t – weakens their return skills.
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Jul 1, 2009 7:03 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's why you need a WR or two...
..making Hester not the focal point of the receiving corp.
However, if he were to be a #2 or even better a #3, then maybe he would get back on track as a returner. Note that Eddie Royal was still an effective returner, despite catching 91 balls. Regardless he is still far more dangerous as a returner than he ever will be as a WR.
But to not move him to WR would have brought out the diva act and he’d probably have left Chicago already. Making him a WR was the right thing, if only to keep your best weapon, but they never should have put him in a position to be #1 where his focus is completely and totally on being “the man”, while his return abilities are squandered.
As a #3WR it would have applied less pressure on offense production and sent the message that his return abilities are still very much important and needs his focus.
"You can make mistakes, but you are not a failure until you blame others for those mistakes." -John Wooden
by Randall15 on Jul 2, 2009 1:36 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
ST&NO
Although probably already defined somewhere, would you please tell me what ST&NO stands for?
by Endzone on Jun 30, 2009 8:39 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Texans and Williams vs Bush
One of the resons the Texans chose Williams is that they had reached an agreement with him, which they weren’t able to do with Bush. If you have the first over all pick (or are stuck with it, depending on point of view) you better have a contract in place before the draft, or you could find yourself in the position of the Raiders in 07.
The sage is full of anxiety and indecision in undertaking anything, and so he is always successful.
Chuang - Tzu
by bradley on Jun 30, 2009 8:46 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Actually I'm pretty sure they had a contract with Bush as well.
At least, I remember Casserly saying as much. I just came down to who they prefered.
Thankfully for Texans fans their management had the foresight to make the right decision, not the popular one. Which often times seems to get confused.
"You can make mistakes, but you are not a failure until you blame others for those mistakes." -John Wooden
by Randall15 on Jul 1, 2009 2:27 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry about that, my toddler sitting on my lap got the keyboard
by huskersnchiefs on Jun 30, 2009 9:10 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with him
"If people define situations as real, they are real in their consequences". W. I. Thomas
by Colinski on Jun 30, 2009 10:43 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great job -
Thoroughly enjoyed your perspective regarding the teams.
Not sure I think Anthony Gonzales is “below average for a #2,” since he showed good hands and route running last year, and his speed (4.44 sec. 40 yard dash) is not half bad. He’ll be open plenty of times with Wayne getting doubled across from him. I believe Dallas Clark will act like a third receiver this year and get a boatload of targets. I’m no Colts fan, but Indy shouldn’t miss a beat without an older Harrison.
Again, great job and thanks for taking the time to do it.
Take my advice... I'm not using it!
Just click your heels together three times and say, "There's no player like Hillis... there's no player like Hillis."
by BroncTastic on Jun 30, 2009 9:31 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Questionable aspect for the New England Patriots also must be the loss of McDaniels
Belicheck has always done an excellent job of replacing his departed coordinators, due to his high level of influence on the team, but it seems as over these past few years the Patriots offense has been mostly McD’s, and these past couple of years have been when it has been its very best. Belicheck has never commended or made a public comment stating the loss of a coordinator until McD came to Denver.
I dont believe the Patriot offense will struggle too much due to having Brady back, but with his knee injury and a suspect line that may just cause some problems. Palmer wasnt the same player because his line couldnt hold up for him, and he began rushing and forcing passes.
The Patriots will be a very interesting team to watch this year, and I truly believe the loss of McDaniels will be difficult for this team to overcome.
On To Victory!!!
by alacumba!! on Jun 30, 2009 9:47 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Luck vs Scouting
The Mario Williams stories are amazing. I read a great article recently where they went into the choice to pick Mario from the Texans point of view and gave the reasoning behind it. Then in the final paragraph the writer speculated if it was Luck on the Texans part.
Luck? How come when a team picks a guy like Matt Ryan and it works that it is never pure Luck. No it is insight on the part of the team to draft the guy that everyone told them to. Were the Titans unlucky to draft Young or the Cardinals unlucky?
The guts by the Texans to take Super Mario points directly to decision making and they should be given all the aplomb in the world for seeing what others didn’t. Good people make their own luck.
Tis better not to throw it to the deep receiver but the open receiver.
by Kfustud on Jun 30, 2009 10:18 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Clayton
Pointing out silly or nonsensical analysis in a John Clayton post is shooting ducks in a barrel.
I’m just impressed he made it through one whole column without the usual borderline ad hominem attacks on Coach McDaniels. Personal growth! Hurray!
by jvill on Jun 30, 2009 10:54 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I stopped taking this entire post seriously after I read this line
If any team should have signed Terrell Owens, it’s the Colts.
Ha!
SB Nation's Indianapolis Colts blogger at Stampede Blue. Please make an account and post a diary, add some comments, and make some noise. Accounts are free, and only require an email address.
by BigBlueShoe on Jun 30, 2009 11:43 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Glad you like my work
"I am not one of those who think that coming in second or third is winning." -- Robert F. Kennedy
by Ted Bartlett on Jun 30, 2009 11:50 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
In general, I do!
But come on, man! TO?
If you listen to my podcast this evening, i’m talking about your breakdown.
SB Nation's Indianapolis Colts blogger at Stampede Blue. Please make an account and post a diary, add some comments, and make some noise. Accounts are free, and only require an email address.
by BigBlueShoe on Jun 30, 2009 1:26 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
To me, the Colts signing Owens for 1 year and $6 Million...
(which is what the Bills paid,) had Super Bowl upside, and very little downside. If he is a problem, you cut him, and face no significant financial exposure, but I can virtually guarantee he’s not going to be a problem on a short-term/low-money deal. I would have considered it totally analogous to the Patriots buying low on Randy Moss a couple years ago, which has paid off extremely well for them.
The fact is, TO is still one of the best players in the NFL, and when you can get one of those on your own terms, and with a good risk management strategy in place, I think you do it. My respect for Peyton Manning and the Colts organization is what makes me think it would have worked really well. But, if you’ve read my stuff, you know I am big on thinking for myself. I respect your opinion, different from mine, though it may be.
"I am not one of those who think that coming in second or third is winning." -- Robert F. Kennedy
by Ted Bartlett on Jun 30, 2009 2:02 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ted
The guy is a complete locker room cancer. He is also HIGHLY over-rated. How many playoff games has he helped his teams win this decade? 1. It was with the 49ers. He never won a single playoff game in Philly or Dallas. TO is certainly not one of the best players in the NFL. That statement trumps your ignorant statement about Gonzalez being a bad #2 wide out.
Again, I very much enjoy your stuff, but your analysis of the Colts was very flawed, and there is more of a chance the Colts would sign YOU than Terrell Owens.
SB Nation's Indianapolis Colts blogger at Stampede Blue. Please make an account and post a diary, add some comments, and make some noise. Accounts are free, and only require an email address.
by BigBlueShoe on Jun 30, 2009 2:06 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not one to agree with BBS,
…but I have to on this one. T.O. is a cancer, and doesn’t fit the Indy player profile. I just can’t see the fit at all. I think the Colts would want him in Indy as much as we would want him in Denver. (Disclaimer – I live near Indy).
I do agree, however, with Ted on several other points. I agree that the Colts are likely to decline somewhat. Peyton is too good to let the team fall far, but the coaching change and the loss of a few players over time (Stokley, Harrision, etc) should take some toll on the team.
I also agree that SD is going to start declining as well.
I’m not sure if the IQ thing and SD was meant to be toungue in cheek or not. Those advertisements about celebrity IQs (and testing your own) are garbage. No way a bunch of college educated professional football players are that low. And there is no valid IQ test that is going to be measured without being done in person with a licensed psychometrist or psychologist. Just sayin’.
Other than the T.O. thing (which I was going to comment on before I got to BBS’s comments), I think everything is dead on accurate. Keep up the great work!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Jun 30, 2009 2:50 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
The IQ is tongue in cheek
That would leave most of the players at or below the line of the educable mentally retarded. That’s a lot of fun as a jest, but given the requirements of the game mentally, it’s also absurd.
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Jun 30, 2009 3:38 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
It was funny...which was the point. I laughed my ass off. Copied the pic to my phone and texted it to my Charger-loving family members. :)
Verbose in style, dispersion of thought, procrastination in life.
by Tim Lynch on Jun 30, 2009 3:47 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes TO is a serious Cancer
But on any team with Super Bowl aspirations, the risk would be worth thereward for 1 year.
"You give 100 percent in the first half of the game, and if that isn't enough, in the second half you give what's left." – Yogi Berra
"No, I'm from Iowa, I only work in outer space."
by KaptainKirk on Jun 30, 2009 4:39 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Harrison
Was a thug and lasted years there, why couldn’t a loud mouth last a year?
by trumanj on Jun 30, 2009 5:54 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Marvin Harrison
This is, like, a joke right? If not, you’re completely ignorant about Marvin Harrison.
SB Nation's Indianapolis Colts blogger at Stampede Blue. Please make an account and post a diary, add some comments, and make some noise. Accounts are free, and only require an email address.
by BigBlueShoe on Jun 30, 2009 7:18 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
not really
he’s just kept quiet (see his involvement in the shooting)…but trust me the guy is a thug and that’s part of why he’s not getting signed
by trumanj on Jun 30, 2009 7:31 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
that
and his knee is shot according to some reports I have heard
by Sneaky Sean on Jun 30, 2009 9:02 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Including mine
Hillis/Moreno in '09
by Emmett Smith on Jun 30, 2009 10:25 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Complimentary
I also agree that TO is a cancer, but thought that Ted’s article was extremely complimentary to the Colt’s organization.
by Endzone on Jun 30, 2009 2:53 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yep be there for that...not!
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
All I want is 53 Rod Smiths. Is that asking too much????
"Peyton Hillis didn’t rip the sleeves off his jersey, they flew off out of fear."
Calijoefornia.
by boydy2669 on Jun 30, 2009 8:26 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks man!
Gee…is there a bias in the poll there? lmao
Verbose in style, dispersion of thought, procrastination in life.
by Tim Lynch on Jun 30, 2009 11:47 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Not if you're looking...
through Orange-colored glasses!
Take my advice... I'm not using it!
Just click your heels together three times and say, "There's no player like Hillis... there's no player like Hillis."
by BroncTastic on Jun 30, 2009 12:55 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey...don't we have an .800 all-time winning percentage against NE anyways? :)
Verbose in style, dispersion of thought, procrastination in life.
by Tim Lynch on Jun 30, 2009 3:21 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nice.
Enjoyable as always. We don’t see eye to eye on everythng, but I like your work. Keep it up and go Broncos!
"A player who conjugates a verb in the first person singular cannot be part of the squad, he has to conjugate the verb in the first person plural. We. We want to conquer. We are going to conquer. Using the word 'I' when you're in a group makes things complicated." ~ Wanderley Luxemburgo, 1999
by ejruiz on Jun 30, 2009 1:30 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
My usual two cents . . .
I agree with the thought that Indy will probably drop a bit this year – but signing Owens in Indy? You’ve got to be kidding – not in a million years! I also think that Brady will be just fine this season. Torn knees affect a whole lot of other positions far more than the QB and I expect that even if he’s not completely healed (usually about a year), he’ll muddle by this year.
It's "just" football
by Donkhead on Jun 30, 2009 1:31 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Underachieving SD
I can’t put my finger on what it exactly is, but they have a real underachiever streak. Their talent is also downgraded a bit from last season, and for the second year in a row, they didn’t do a lot to improve in the draft.
It’s called Norv Turner.
(Haven’t figured out how to Hi-lite what someone else said)
I voted Indy -NE but I wasn’t convinced. Pretty much a toss-up
by 3nS on Jun 30, 2009 1:55 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Norv Turner IS the problem
They were better off with Marty Schottenheimer.
"You give 100 percent in the first half of the game, and if that isn't enough, in the second half you give what's left." – Yogi Berra
"No, I'm from Iowa, I only work in outer space."
by KaptainKirk on Jun 30, 2009 4:41 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've always respected Schottenheimer as a coach
but you have to admit that the man did have some sort of playoff curse. Not sure if he was just a bit too predictable or what, but it seemed like every time the playoffs came around, opposing teams had his number.
by gOOn on Jun 30, 2009 4:45 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah
and his number was 7 as in elway…those two loses broke his spirit forever (at least I think so)
by Sneaky Sean on Jun 30, 2009 8:58 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
2???
I know you’re talking about playoffs, but man Elway pushed Schottenheimer around, knocked him to the ground, kicked sand in his face, then sat on him, just to add insult to injury. I still remember the, I think, 13 point come back in the 4th, I think I saw Schotty crying on the sideline.
by gOOn on Jul 1, 2009 2:45 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
to high ligh stuff
click on the blue quotes and then BLOCKQUOTE will appear twice in succession then enter your quote in between the two words BLOCKQUOTE
HILLIS
by robbo650 on Jun 30, 2009 5:43 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Owens; Bad, very bad, and why any team would want him is beyond me.
As far as the statement about Gonzalez being a “bad” 2nd WR, it probably is true. He makes a great slot receiver as well as Stokely does for Denver, but for WR, nope, no can do! Great post Ted as always and I look forward to see your articulate analyst of teams.
by bfree2bronc on Jun 30, 2009 6:01 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
People want TO because for some hope springs eternal
they believe their coaches/team will be the one to turn him around and make him a great person in addition to being a great talent.
Pray for the best, prepare for the worst, and know you will come down somewhere between the two.
Livin' in La La Land and Lovin' It
by BShrout on Jun 30, 2009 6:34 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
oh, I should go on record as saying
DO NOT BRING HIM TO DOVE VALLEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Pray for the best, prepare for the worst, and know you will come down somewhere between the two.
Livin' in La La Land and Lovin' It
by BShrout on Jun 30, 2009 6:34 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
It would be interesting to see him in Indy.
He would have no more excuses. Look at what Randy Moss did in a similar situation in New England, and everyone (including me) berated the Pats for picking him up. I actually follow the logic that Ted is pushing and I think it’d be interesting to see him in a high-quality organization with an elite quarterback. Even if he did act up, Manning would put him in his place and they could bench him for little cost.
No stairway... Denied!
by papigrande on Jun 30, 2009 8:56 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
re: "7 points"
The weird thing about Thompson’s column is that the ‘real’ story is how far Bly has fallen, which I knew was a real danger when we traded for him. It looked like a reasonable deal back then, because it traded our problems (i.e., Bell, Foster) for their problem, but there was a danger because he was in decline and there was talk of attitude problems.
I’m happy for Bly, and it’s a good situation for him and them considering their injury problem with Harris, but it’s startlingly little money for a veteran ($845,000), and I don’t think the “minimum salary benefit” was ‘the’ reason for their signing him — the injury to Walt Harris was why they signed him, of course, since the 49ers were about 30 million under the cap according to old numbers.
I’d like to see the cap numbers for this year, and the older material I’ve seen has us well below the cap (as many teams are, although not all). But I don’t know if that’s an artifact from all the cap room we created when we purged Bly, et al.
I’ll spare people a mini-lecture on sunk costs but the other point that Thompson glided by in apparent obliviousness is that we cleared cap space, which is what teams are (usually) trying to do nowadays. You lure the talent you want, by offering upfront money, and cut the player free and accelerate the cap number intentionally. The problem would be if you didn’t have cap room, and we obviously don’t have that problem. The net result is that we could take on a mammoth contract if we wanted to do that next year (although we don’t), or even a pay a bunch of high paying contracts (we might, in resigning people).
Thompson doesn’t say it but there’s an implication that we could have stretched the cap number by re-signing Bly (but not the payment, and we’d be on the hook for more to Bly if we did re-sign him). That would be honoring a sunk cost — a pretty stupid thing to do, but many people do honor them, unfortunately.
BTW — Maybe Thompson should have actually enlightened us by simply telling us everyone’s dead cap number? You think?.
PS — We’re overdue on some marginal analysis. I’m not even a business/accounting type but it’s glaringly obvious to me that many people are utterly missing the point on marginal cost.
"If people define situations as real, they are real in their consequences". W. I. Thomas
by Colinski on Jul 1, 2009 12:56 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs

by 





























