Not the Draft I was hoping 4?

by haze0945 on Apr 24, 2010 4:25 PM MDT

Tim Tebow

Im going to be a bronco fan till I die, but time are rough right now. If I weren't so crazy about football, I wouldn't have watch the rest of this draft after we took Tebow. Yes he is a tremendous leader, very passionate football player, & the guy will never spend a day of his life in trouble. All that being said, drafting this guy was the biggest mistake the Broncos could have made. I have no problem with Tebow as a person but as a player, he's not worth a 1st round pick. On top of that, we gave up 3 quality pick that really could have helped this team, possible 2010 starters. Tebow himself could have been one of our later picks. This is all I have to say about the Tebow decision.

Draft

As for our overall draft, everything turned out O.K. But I feel that with every pick, we took the player that was second best. Is that a good thing?

1st - Dez Bryant 2nd - DeMaryius Thomas

1st - Sam Bradford 2nd - Tim Tebow (I can only pray he becomes 2nd best)

1st - Iupati 2nd - Zane Beadles?(I liked Ducasse/Asamoah)

1st - Maurkice Pouncy 2nd - J.D. Walton (Tennant wasn't that great)

Lets hope for the playoffs in 2010. Go Broncos!!!!

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

Tweet Comment 33 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

If I may...

You’re basing these “1st” and “2nd” rated players on what the media is saying. Not the wisest thing to do overall really.

While the media’s scouting reports offer a good framework on how to rank players, for all you know DeMaryious Thomas was the first rated guy over Dez on Denvers board. And it certainly looks that way because he was picked while both were there. Don’t pin Denver to the cross about that, because Denver’s not the only team that passed on him.

Sam Bradford is the most “pro ready” quarterback, according to scouts. What the hell does that even mean? really? What makes him more “pro-ready” than Tim Tebow? I argue that Bradford has already started the long painful road of irrelevance by going to St. Louis where the coaching knows nothing about quarterbacks. Tebow is more raw than Bradford, but look at the nucleus of coaches that are going to help him! The McD brothers will spend time working with Tebow and he’ll excel because of it. There are no college quarterbacks 100% ready for the pros, even Peyton Manning went 3-13 his first year. It takes time, and Bradford won’t get it. He’s the starter right now. Unfortunately for him, there’s guys in his division that are going to feed on his naivety as a rookie quarterback in a system with no weapons. Tebow will learn for a year or two, and go in slowly.

As for Iupati, I doubt he was ever on McD’s board. Seriously. They never even met with him, if I remember right.

If Denver really planned on getting Pouncey, they would have gotten him at 13 when they were there. They knew he would go to Pitt at 18. Everyone knew Pitt would take him at 18 if he was there. Just like Iupati, I don’t think Pouncey was high on the board anyways.

Comparing Michael Lombardi to Bill Williamson is like comparing an In-N-Out Cheeseburger to a sh## sandwich.

Williamson would probably eat both – no questions asked.

by Joe Medina on Apr 24, 2010 4:36 PM MDT reply actions 1 recs

I totally agree with you Joe

As usual, but to discount the media’s ability to judge players is something we shouldn’t do, considering none, or very few of us have been to the combine, to private workouts, or the interviews. To discount the media’s tools is fun, and they are easy to make fun of, but even our MHR best mock drafts didn’t predict what would happen.

I am a bear of very little brains and big words bother me.

by Topher Doll on Apr 24, 2010 4:50 PM MDT up reply actions

I'm not talking about discrediting the people that do it for a living.

I’ll listen to the opinion of scouts, because that’s their job. I refuse to take the mock draft of Jamie Dukes seriously, because he’s an ignorant biased jerkoff.

Scouts have no slant. They want the best players. Period. Talking heads on television create controversy for the sake of ratings. That’s it. Dukes could care less what McD does, he’s gonna trash him regardless. That’s who he is.

Comparing Michael Lombardi to Bill Williamson is like comparing an In-N-Out Cheeseburger to a sh## sandwich.

Williamson would probably eat both – no questions asked.

by Joe Medina on Apr 24, 2010 4:53 PM MDT up reply actions

Agreed

Unless your a NFL scouting analyst or ex coach, I really don’t trust them too much.

I am a bear of very little brains and big words bother me.

by Topher Doll on Apr 24, 2010 4:55 PM MDT up reply actions

Interesting fact

several stat heads have done statistical analyses on the draft projections of the so-called experts, Kiper et al. These experts do no better than a random selection. In other words, any of the guys who post on MHR are at least as good.

On the other hand, in the aggregate, teams actually do statistically outperform random selection. Which means the real pros, the team scouts and personnel men, know what they are doing, while the “experts” who get paid to criticize them actually don’t know any more than the average fan.

by SlowWhiteGuy on Apr 24, 2010 5:08 PM MDT up reply actions

Thats why those who have coached

Or been on a scouting commitee on a team are the ones you look at for guidence.

I am a bear of very little brains and big words bother me.

by Topher Doll on Apr 24, 2010 5:10 PM MDT up reply actions

agree to a point.

Scouts have much more access to things that we don’t. Scouts have access to previous records, can contact former coaches, current teammates, etc etc etc.

Comparing Michael Lombardi to Bill Williamson is like comparing an In-N-Out Cheeseburger to a sh## sandwich.

Williamson would probably eat both – no questions asked.

by Joe Medina on Apr 24, 2010 5:23 PM MDT up reply actions

So, SWG, I should keep my lucky dart board?

You make a great point. Beyond a few first picks – and even those go to heck if there’s an early trade – most of these guys are busy pretending that their predraft analysis meant something. I don’t think that i heard a single one other than the few who were in the business (Michael Lombardi, as an example, may not be perfect, but he’s a very knowledgeable dude) ever discuss the system a team runs with some degree of detail and talk about why certain players do or don’t rate well for them. The idea that you can create a list of which players are ‘best’ and not specify the systems for them that do and don’t fit is absurd.

It all starts with the lines

by Doc Bear on Apr 24, 2010 10:52 PM MDT up reply actions

Actually they really don't do any pre-draft analysis...

Mostly they are just listening to what they hear from their sources. I don’t think most of them even break down tape on the players they drone on about.

I keep hearing about Tebow’s “bad release” but if you watch, there’s nothing wrong with his release. He did have a low hold and a long windup which he has been working on, but his release is just fine. BTW: that was a knock on both Terry Bradshaw and a certain #7 who played for the Broncos.

They yammer about his footwork, but praise a certain #6 as a franchise QB even though said #6 has almost as bad footwork. I sometimes wonder if they know what they are talking about or if they’re just parroting something they heard because it sounds good.

Keep the dart board – you may still have a future as a draft expert.

by SlowWhiteGuy on Apr 25, 2010 12:06 AM MDT up reply actions

LOL

That’s about it. I keep finding an inaccuracy in a single article, and within a couple of days, it’s all over the net. I’ve been caught in that enough that I’ve started to number all of the sources that I use for articles, expecting that some of the info will be wrong.

It all starts with the lines

by Doc Bear on Apr 25, 2010 12:54 PM MDT up reply actions

McD did mention that Walton was the 2nd C on our board behind Pouncey

Perhaps they felt that they might be able to get Pouncey in the early 20s and if not they’d have a shot at Walton and others later on.

by Timimus on Apr 24, 2010 4:55 PM MDT up reply actions

Good points Joe

but , I disagree with you when you say that “Tebow is more raw than Bradford.” If you saw Gruden’s breakdown of Bradford, he pointed out how he was never asked to read a defense. He was always focused on the offensive coaches on the sideline rather then looking at the defensive alignment shifting in front of him. That’s why he got creamed. and wrecked his shoulder. He’ll have to get coached up big time in that area. I think for the offense that McD wants to run, which isn’t that far from Urban Meyer’s spread tactics, he’s got thet exact QB he wanted. And, I think he may be closer then we think.

by irishbronco on Apr 24, 2010 6:29 PM MDT up reply actions

Couldn't agree with you more

McD has set a precedent with this Broncos team. He drafts players on the basis of character, not talent, which is fine, but they better win games this year…

Suspend disbelief, open your eyes and see the world as new.

Xbox gamertag: DippedOChronic1

by OC3O on Apr 24, 2010 4:39 PM MDT reply actions

i don't know about that. Seems the players we drafted also have a good amount of talent.

I would say that talent alone won’t win as many games as a team effort with hard working, good charactered and talented players will. IMO

by BroncoMath101 on Apr 24, 2010 4:46 PM MDT up reply actions

I heard a really good quote the other day. I think it's worth remembering.

“Hard work beats talents when talent doesn’t work hard”

And that seems to be the epitome of everything McD is moving out, and bringing in to the Broncos.

Comparing Michael Lombardi to Bill Williamson is like comparing an In-N-Out Cheeseburger to a sh## sandwich.

Williamson would probably eat both – no questions asked.

by Joe Medina on Apr 24, 2010 4:51 PM MDT up reply actions

NBA 2K10......................????

I knew that line sounded familiar.

KINGS WILL BE 10-11 CHAMPIONS

by haze0945 on Apr 24, 2010 5:31 PM MDT up reply actions

the saying's a bit older than that...

Because Montana has no professional sports, I gotta support the land of my birth.

Socrates was once executed for 'trolling'.
^Needs explaining: don't call someone asking uncomfortable, slightly antagonistic questions *for the purpose of learning* trolls. It's real easy to differentiate a 'Socratic' post from a trolling one.

by Drizzt396 on Apr 24, 2010 5:32 PM MDT up reply actions

I was just in the MY Player Mode.........

The guide said it about Kevin Durant.

KINGS WILL BE 10-11 CHAMPIONS

by haze0945 on Apr 24, 2010 5:43 PM MDT up reply actions

I don't think he's trying to draft a team of choir boys.

He is trying to draft a team of tough, resilient players who will hang together as a team when they face adversity. McD doesn’t want a team who only wins pretty. He wants a team that can win ugly when it needs to. That’s very difficult to do with self centered or irresponsible player, regardless of their talent.

by SlowWhiteGuy on Apr 24, 2010 5:12 PM MDT up reply actions

Sam Bradford is Not going to be the best QB he can’t work in a pro style offense and has no one to throw to or block for him

by VR92 on Apr 24, 2010 4:43 PM MDT reply actions

Jason Smith?

"All by their heads, he places crowns."

by Tempestuous Binary on Apr 24, 2010 5:28 PM MDT up reply actions

Tebow however, is a tremendous athlete with a work ethic the likes of which we’ve never seen. Who is extremely smart coming into an offense with a coach excels at bringing up Qb’s. The throwing motion is fixed because as he said he was throwing 900 balls a day the same way. He won’t start this year but I think he will be better than Bradford.

by VR92 on Apr 24, 2010 4:47 PM MDT reply actions

Oh, snap!

"All by their heads, he places crowns."

by Tempestuous Binary on Apr 24, 2010 5:28 PM MDT reply actions

three of the four 'first' players you listed all went in the first round before we picked

so what’s your point? that 31 other teams get to pick the players they want too?

Because Montana has no professional sports, I gotta support the land of my birth.

by Drizzt396 on Apr 24, 2010 5:33 PM MDT reply actions

I get your point..............

Even I knew that. It was more of a shot toward McD and his choice on Tebow and to pass up Bryant. Basically, his high value for high character players. If he drafts Bryant, and any other guy that belonged in the 1st round, we’d have two 1st instead of 2nd best. And even in the 2nd round, I was shocked when we took Beadles over Ducasse/Asamoah.

KINGS WILL BE 10-11 CHAMPIONS

by haze0945 on Apr 24, 2010 6:02 PM MDT up reply actions

Dez vs Thomas...

Thomas gives us the big target with the deep speed and squeaky clean character that Dez can’t bring. He will have to work on his route running, but it’s hard to fault McD on this pick.

Asamoah was my favorite for inside help on the OL, but Beadles can play 4 positions on the line and you have to recognize the value in that. Who would fill in for Harris if he went down again? Polumbus? Cant say I’m real disappointed about the added options for a replacement on the ends if we need it.

The Tebow pick reminds me of the Cutler pick. Both QB’s were tailor made for the coach that picked them. Shanny wanted a big arm that could go deep without the deficiencies he saw in Plummer. Tebow is the poster child for everything that McD preaches. Hard working team-first guy that gives you all he has. Biggest difference between the picks is we were coming off an AFC title game loss when we picked our last 1st round QB. Last year it seemed like the consensus around here was we needed a new QB. Well now we have one. I have my doubts however that the new signal caller on the roster will quell the general unrest and discontent around here.

by donbok1 on Apr 24, 2010 8:19 PM MDT up reply actions

Tebow

Could easily fill in for Harris or Clady :)

by trumanj on Apr 24, 2010 10:00 PM MDT up reply actions

just poorly put, then, I guess

I liked Thomas over Bryant though.

Because Montana has no professional sports, I gotta support the land of my birth.

by Drizzt396 on Apr 25, 2010 4:44 AM MDT up reply actions

If they had taken the first option they would have gotten half the bodies- or less

I’ll take 4 solid TEAM players over 2 or less STARS

I too dabbled in pacifism once...

by waltersobchakbronco on Apr 24, 2010 5:39 PM MDT reply actions

I dont have a problem with any of the other players we took.....

I thought they were all 2nd best, it could have been way worse. Tebow, were we drafted him and what we gave up for him is the only real problem I have. I really felt we could have kept our 2nd, 3rd, & 4th pick and maybe still gotten Tebow. I personally don’t see him as our QB of the future & feel that not only was he a waste of a 1st round pick, but you have to look at the 3 picks we gave up to get him. Those picks could have been 3 more solid TEAM players, yet we walk away with 1 STAR or less.

Lets hope he turns into a STAR.

KINGS WILL BE 10-11 CHAMPIONS

by haze0945 on Apr 24, 2010 5:53 PM MDT up reply actions

I don't think Tebow would have been there later.

People on ESPN were saying that teams were maneuvering to get in line for him.. Of course I have no real source for this info, but my opinion is that Tebow would NOT have been there for later picks that we had. Also, when you break it down, the “price” we paid wasn’t steep at all.
Think of it this way. We got our first choice and our second choice. We just gave up a fourth round pick to get it the way we wanted it.
So the way I see it, McD manufactured the trading stock, then spent it. That’s all. He targeted both 1st round selections and maneuvered masterfully to get them. That’s sharp!

by buckhammer on Apr 24, 2010 6:06 PM MDT reply actions 1 recs