DT availability as of 8/18
by myerda00 on Aug 17, 2011 12:08 PM MDT
Email
Print11. Pat Williams, NT, Vikings. Age: 38.
26. Desmond Bryant (ERFA), DT, Raiders. Age: 25.
29. Marcus Stroud, DT, Patriots. Age: 33. (recent NE release??)
30. Jamal Williams, NT, Broncos. Age: 35. (stop gap after 8/30 ?)
31. Robaire Smith, DE/DT, Browns. Age: 33.
34. Tony Brown, DT, Titans. Age: 30.
43. Tank Johnson, DT, Bengals. Age: 29.
44. Ma'ake Kemoeatu, NT, Redskins. Age: 32.
45. Jimmy Kennedy, DT, Vikings. Age: 31.
48. Martin Parker, DT, Richmond. Age: 23. (was on the draft list)
53. Travis Johnson, DE/DT, Chargers. Age: 29.
55. Justin Harrell, DT, Packers. Age: 27. ( I like this)
56. Vance Walker, DT, Falcons. Age: 24.
57. Clifton Ryan, DT, Rams. Age: 27.
58. Trevor Pryce, DE/DT, Jets. Age: 36.
59. Nick Hayden (RFA), DT, Panthers. Age: 25.
60. Jarvis Green, DE/DT, Texans. Age: 32.
62. Leger Douzable (RFA), DT, Jaguars. Age: 25.
63. Brian Schaefering, DE/DT, Browns. Age: 28.
65. Bryan Robinson, DT, Cardinals. Age: 37.
67. Marques Douglas, DE/DT, Titans. Age: 34.
69. Lamar Divens, NT, Ravens. Age: 25. (Ravens cuts usually very good)
70. John McCargo, DT, Bills. Age: 28.
71. Ed Johnson, DT, Panthers. Age: 27.
72. Kelly Talavou, NT, Ravens. Age: 26.
74. Chris Baker, NT, Dolphins. Age: 23. (I wonder how much Nunnley liked him?)
This is a Fan-Created Comment on MileHighReport.com. The opinion here is not necessarily shared by the editorial staff of MHR
54 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Ma'ake!!!!
"When Tim Tebow does pushups, he's not pushing himself up, he's pushing the world down."
"Gear down there big shifter This is the "No Bull" review man…" a total Lebowski-esque one liner from Sadaraine, whether he realizes it or not - comedic gold.
Very interesting list.
Jarvis Green anyone? ON
Bryant and Hayden are restricted, so that would be cost.
Parker and Baker would be development.
Williams could be a last minute stop gap.
And how about the TWO NT from the Ravens,?
Thank for putting this together
I think the Ravens cuts are interesting. I wonder how much Stroud has left in the tank, he would be interesting as well.
"I get sick when I hear athletes say I’m not a role model" "Yes you are. You’re just not a very good one." -Tim Tebow
Sounds like he has a "bum shoulder"
OK, so Brian and The Johns really did very well at the Defensive Tackle position, especially considering the limited cash budget they likely had to work with. I no longer hear laughter from opposing RBs in my nightmares!!!
Justin Harrell is an intriguing option as well
"When Tim Tebow does pushups, he's not pushing himself up, he's pushing the world down."
"Gear down there big shifter This is the "No Bull" review man…" a total Lebowski-esque one liner from Sadaraine, whether he realizes it or not - comedic gold.
I remember Tank being pretty good with the Bears
before his suspensions. I think he did pretty well with the Cowboys as well. Haven’t followed him much with the Bungles.
"I get sick when I hear athletes say I’m not a role model" "Yes you are. You’re just not a very good one." -Tim Tebow
I would consider...
Harrello and Tank. Harrell was discused by many folks on Broncos’ blogs a couple of years ago. Tank can be mean and might be worth a look to see if he has been able to learn to not to crap on his own bed………
I hate that Trevor Pryce is 36
I have missed that guy ever since he left…
Out of these available DTs…I like the two Ravens. IF….IF…they are healthy. Divens was on IR last year but the Ravens fan sites had good things to say about Talavou and Divens. They are both about 6’3 to 6’4 and 330-340 so that would beef up the interior nicely.
I’d be happy with just about any pick up at this point just to get some depth EXCEPT…1) Another Patriots castoff (when are we gonna learn from our mistakes) and 2) Anyone over the age of 28 b/c I don’t want us to have to address this need again in the near future if we can help it
My Team Can Beat Up Your Team
by DominantDenverDefense on Aug 17, 2011 1:07 PM MDT reply actions
Anyone over the age of 28 b/c I don’t want us to have to address this need again in the near future if we can help it
This is our M.O. – taking guys that can be had on a short-term deal. Management’s mission has clearly been to stop the bleeding at DT without giving long-term commitments or mounds of money. It seems to me they want to draft their own DT next year and are only looking for a short term fix. 26 year olds don’t fit that category.
OK, so Brian and The Johns really did very well at the Defensive Tackle position, especially considering the limited cash budget they likely had to work with. I no longer hear laughter from opposing RBs in my nightmares!!!
Why do you think theywill draft a .....
….DT next year? I agree it seems to make sense. But how many people would have believed even a little bit, that we wouldn’t draft a DT in the last draft?
"Pain don't hurt" - Swayze (Road House) -- We miss you man!
I really think it was just sort of a perfect storm this year
I really don’t think it was a big conspiracy or that they didn’t think we need a DT really badly… I think it was just a simple case where at each pick they just liked another guy better (at another position of need) and didn’t want to reach.
I think if we came to a situation where they drafted a WR in the 2nd/3rd round over a DT and tried to tell us it was due to having a higher grade on him, well I’d be picketing at Dove Valley right now. But they used each pick at a position of need. As such, I really think they just had the mind set, like they told us, that not all our needs could be filled in the draft… so why reach. Again, though, I’m only in agreement because all positions were needed positions. It’s not like they skipped a DT to draft a QB.
Another thing is that I actually like how they were able to double up on positions because it increases the odds of working out. Draft two safeties and chances are twice as good that we can release Hill (which we did). Draft three linebackers, and chances of filling out those empty roster spots are all that much higher.
Anyway, I guess I’m saying I don’t really ask why we didn’t draft a DT. I think they just didn’t like Austin and Paea like we all did, and I think the rest was history. The reason I think they want to “home grow” DTs is because Fox isn’t used to spending big money there and because all our pickups at DT have been very short term, including Vick, Thomas, Bunk, Warren and McBean. None of these guys have contracts with us after next year. Looks to me like Foxy Bear likes to draft them rather than to pay them big bucks. Which reminds me, I’m glad we drafted a pass rusher at #2 instead of a DT. It saves us a lot of money because pass rushers cost twice as much as a DT in the open market.
OK, so Brian and The Johns really did very well at the Defensive Tackle position, especially considering the limited cash budget they likely had to work with. I no longer hear laughter from opposing RBs in my nightmares!!!
by Rodney A on Aug 17, 2011 1:34 PM MDT up reply actions 3 recs
I think you could, but the solution doesn't really fit this specific problem.
We could add a young DT that hits the waiver waver, even a guy drafted this last year. And it might even be a guy that was taken in say the 5th round that we were high on. All of that could happen, but none of that is a solution to losing our starting DT. No youngster off the waiver wire can come in here and replace Ty Warren with just 11 days to learn the system and correct whatever he was doing wrong at his last spot.
The other idea is to trade for a youngster that has already shown he’s got the ability. Unless he was drafted top-ten, then his contract is cheap and he’s still new enough to not have learned a bunch of bad habits. Think Dan Williams as an example. The problem is that draft picks don’t always work out. So if a team like the Cards drafted Williams in the 1st/2nd round and he already showed that he’ll work…. they’re either not going to let him go, or they’re going to want a lot for him. I’m down for an idea like this – I just think it’s easier said than done.
OK, so Brian and The Johns really did very well at the Defensive Tackle position, especially considering the limited cash budget they likely had to work with. I no longer hear laughter from opposing RBs in my nightmares!!!
I think you hit on the catch-22 above....
….the guys we picked up are only on contract for next year. But DT is one of those positions that most picks won’t be major contributors for a few years. So even if we address DT next year, we can’t really expect them to contribute. That is why we should have found a way to start developing one this year. Somewhere. But I have heard and agree that the draft just didn’t present in a way that we wanted to take a DT at our slots. BUt sooner or later, we have to take a shot.
"Pain don't hurt" - Swayze (Road House) -- We miss you man!
Yeah, it's pretty fluid now
Ty Warren was supposed to be starting here for two years, which would have allowed for the opportunity of one starting spot leftover. I think that’s ideal. Ideally we’d want to have one very solid veteran starter locked up for about two years and some quality depth (like we do/did have) so that between all those guys and whatever new guy we draft (early)… one of them will rise above and be able to take that starting spot that Bunk vacates. As to how long it takes rookies to contribute on average, I think that varies greatly on where you draft them and how bad you need them.
Anyway, now that Warren has left, the plan took a serious hit. I still like that plan and hope we tweak it so that his replacement is a solid vet this year and then either that replacement or he himself is still around for 2012. I like the strategy of bringing in guys on short term contracts so that our depth remains flexible – so that we have room for a rising star to start but so that we also aren’t actually having to depend on that happening from one single guy.
OK, so Brian and The Johns really did very well at the Defensive Tackle position, especially considering the limited cash budget they likely had to work with. I no longer hear laughter from opposing RBs in my nightmares!!!
J-Wall, Tank, Kemoeatu and Pryce are the four most likely IMO
Thanks for the work!
OK, so Brian and The Johns really did very well at the Defensive Tackle position, especially considering the limited cash budget they likely had to work with. I no longer hear laughter from opposing RBs in my nightmares!!!
And the Ravens but I don't know much about them
Apparently they’re fat and Daddy like fat boys
OK, so Brian and The Johns really did very well at the Defensive Tackle position, especially considering the limited cash budget they likely had to work with. I no longer hear laughter from opposing RBs in my nightmares!!!
Are any of these guys a upgrade over Vickerson, Bunkley, Thomas, and Jarmon? I think maybe big Jamal would be able to do what Fox would have used Warren for. Also Kemoeatu could fill that need as well.
"If we cannot find a way, we will make one." -Hannibal
by AvalancheRescueDog on Aug 17, 2011 1:15 PM MDT reply actions
Yes
Little Vick isn’t going to make a good starter, IMO, now that he lost all that weight. I’ve said that from the start, so I hate to sound like a broken record. But for what it’s worth, I also argued with like a dozen people giving the opinion that the weight loss goes against everything Fox stands for and I openly bet that Vick went Rogue and lost the weight without permission. Obviously now we know that was indeed the case.
The reason I bring this up is because the reason I felt so strongly that he did it without permission is the same reason I don’t think he’s a capable starter in this system… he’s too little now. We needed him as a nose guard… now I see him as the under tackle, but not a solid starter
OK, so Brian and The Johns really did very well at the Defensive Tackle position, especially considering the limited cash budget they likely had to work with. I no longer hear laughter from opposing RBs in my nightmares!!!
Since when is Martin Parker available?
Love to snag and develop him.
Follow me on Twitter: ballinnickcast
Xbox360 gamertag: SnipeMeHarder
NFL supplemental draft
I only know about it because of Terrelle Prior. How does this work, will the Broncos be able to pick players in this draft, and would there be any potential DT’s to take?
Kind of a sealed bid thing
Once it starts, any team can submit a “pick” for a player – call the player X. The Broncos could submit a pick that says they will take X in the 4th round. If another team says they will take X in the 3rd round, then that team gets X, and loses their 3rd round pick in 2012.
I have no idea who all will be available. I think it’s only a couple players in all.
Personal relations consist of an uneasy truce between powerful, solitary fantasy systems.
Janet Malcolm
Michael McAdoo?
If I was EFX I’d be looking long and hard at this guy
And now for something completely different
by AlbertaBronc on Aug 18, 2011 10:26 AM MDT up reply actions
Me too
But our exterior DLine sound very good for me… the problem is the interior part.
I bleed Orange & Blue.
by Fabio Broncos on Aug 18, 2011 11:16 AM MDT up reply actions
Whatever they do, I hope it's nobody over 28 yrs old
We need to, and are I believe are, look to the future. We’ll just have to take our lumps this year, and rebuild from the ground up. And oh by the way, TT should be ready to roll in his 4th year. That’s the year I’m reserving Super Bowl tickets and the EFX machine will be well oiled and rocking.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, he'll eat for a lifetime.
"As a quarterback, all you want is an opportunity to lead your team to victory" - Tim Tebow
He followed McDaniels to the Rams
He felt blindsided by this new regime. He was mad at them. He said so… clearly. I still don’t know why everyone thought we were going to bring him back. He never wanted to come back.
OK, so Brian and The Johns really did very well at the Defensive Tackle position, especially considering the limited cash budget they likely had to work with. I no longer hear laughter from opposing RBs in my nightmares!!!
too bad
Cant say I blame him, I was suprised that they cut him. Jamal I could understand. But he was pretty solid I thought.
by Elvisdoom4QBs on Aug 17, 2011 2:59 PM MDT up reply actions
I don't want to start anything
just curious if he said or did anything last year that “tied” him to McD??? I am not aware of any issues with him. I wonder why the Broncos cut him when they did. I don’t see any benefit to the timing unless it was a money issue.
The beauty of MHR! We vent, argue, and proclaim greatness and smartness to our fellow bloggers. Thank goodness because nobody else is listening. -
All I meant was that, “The Denver Post’s Mike Klis reports former Broncos HC and current Rams OC Josh McDaniels played a part in luring Bannan to St. Louis.” Link.
As to the issues with him, “I’ve never been so blindsided,” Bannan said. “I’ve never been so confident that I held up my end of the bargain. I did my job. I gave it everything I had. It broke my heart.” He went on to say, ""I guess I’m just not what they want right now. Obviously, it’s very disappointing." Link.
Bannan was truly hurt and probably never truly considered coming back. In fact, I even had it in my signature line for a while trying to get people to stop wishing and hoping for him, knowing it wasn’t a legit possibility.
As to why he was cut, it was a cap issue. His 2011 salary was the same as they signed Warren for, but he was on a five year deal. The salary cap isn’t that important this year, but later years it will be and his cap hit would have negatively impacted us. They asked him to restructure on a one-year deal. He said no.
OK, so Brian and The Johns really did very well at the Defensive Tackle position, especially considering the limited cash budget they likely had to work with. I no longer hear laughter from opposing RBs in my nightmares!!!
Thanks Rodney
I was just throwing a question out. Not suggesting anything at all.
The beauty of MHR! We vent, argue, and proclaim greatness and smartness to our fellow bloggers. Thank goodness because nobody else is listening. -
Ya, pretty much the same amount as Ty Warren, Stephen Bowen and Cullen Jenkins
That’s a lot.
OK, so Brian and The Johns really did very well at the Defensive Tackle position, especially considering the limited cash budget they likely had to work with. I no longer hear laughter from opposing RBs in my nightmares!!!
Letting Justin Bannsn go was a mistake.
I thought that he was the best D-lineman last year, by a large margin. We shouldn’t have let Trevor Pryce go, but I saw him play last year and their is not much left in his tank.
John McCargo
The add of the beast Marcel Dareus gave the Bills the spot to release him. He is not the DT of my dreams, or even was on my top-10 first wishlist, but he could fill a hole for 1 or 2 years while we build this group trough the draft.
But hey, I still have a big hope that Ty Warren misses the preseason but puts some raiders’ OLs down in the first MNF of the year.
I bleed Orange & Blue.
Warren is gone for most of the season, if he is able to play at all this year.
Thomas might be able to play the first week against the Faiders
Ding Dong the lockout's dead
by DE_BroncoFan on Aug 18, 2011 7:32 AM MDT up reply actions
The last medical review I read,
was optimistic about he playing our last 5 games if we are in a postseason contend.
That’s what I’m hoping for =(
I bleed Orange & Blue.
by Fabio Broncos on Aug 18, 2011 8:24 AM MDT up reply actions
There's some good run stuffers still left.
I’d take Ma’ake Kemoeatu and Jimmy Kennedy. Get those two for one year deals and the broncos would be set.
by tiderfootball09 on Aug 17, 2011 8:02 PM MDT reply actions
These 2
and McCargo are the ones I would look at…
Remember we are really looking at a situational guy to spell Bunkley/Thomas/Vickerson in run situations. In passing situations, Ayers or Jarmon will slide inside while Miller plays some DE/edge rusher.
I’m okay with a stopgap for depth… we have 3 guys already that can serve as the core rotation, and therefore we’re really just looking for injury insurance (i.e. better than McBean).
Very true. It wouldn't hurt and they'd come at a cheap price for one year. So it wouldn't affect next year's free agency.
I’m not sure why the broncos don’t do that but it beats me.
by tiderfootball09 on Aug 18, 2011 2:26 PM MDT up reply actions
All I can think
… is Fox thinks some of our camp fodder has promise that may be developed, and/or is convinced that the waiver wire will produce something better in the future.
These old vets are basically replacement level or below, and there is no guaruntee these guys are necessarily better than McBean (who we may still be evaluating)… if they are not, there is no roster space for them anyway. I can easily buy the argument that there may just be no hurry to bring them in, as they are no better or worse than folks that will be available in 3 weeks when the roster is being finalized.
It may be worth more to keep looking at our current youngsters than waste reps on a vet that probably doesn’t need it and who can br brought in later if we decide an upgrade is necessary.
Given the limited role they will likely play, it is not like the playbook is gonna be real tough for them to learn. If they were a DB/LB that needed to learn the coverage calls/schemes, etc., maybe you bring them in early… but these guys role will be: “see the center and the guard there?… keep them busy so the LBs can make a play”.
And even if a couple of these guys get picked up, the remaining won’t necessarily worse than what remains, especially once the waiver wire fills up.
Couple of points
IMO Fox makes very little personnel decisions. Brian Xanders has a staff that keeps track of the Bronco type players they want, pro=Kidd college=Russell and their staffs.
Now Fox is envolved yes but he mainly coaches.
an astute observation
Yes, Kidd is a very experienced Pro Personnel guy. I think you are the first poster (beside me) to acknowledge who he is and what he does. It always puzzled me that some fans believed that McDaniels replicated Kidd’s and Russell’s functions in his spare time. I can buy into the idea that he did some micro-managing but it’s a gargantuan task that’s better left to those with time and expertise.
Fox has undoubtedly communicated his needs and desires regarding players to the GM side, so they’re on the same page, but the everyday task of tracking players takes more time than he has.
******* George Santayana described fanaticism as -- "redoubling your effort after you've forgotten your aim"
My point is more along the lines of Colinski's last point
We haven’t added new guys, because none are obviously better than what we already have (or could have in the future with waiver cuts), and Fox isn’t clamoring to the GM/Player personnel dept that he needs new DT bodies for the backend of the rotation. Rather than Fox, I should’ve said EFX, but the rest of the post stands.
clarification
I wasn’t addressing your points but making one about how the FO functions. A considerable amount of work goes into grading prospects before whoever — McDaniels, Xanders, Fox etc. — makes the decision on acquiring that player. It’s become all too common for MHR posters to attribute personnel moves to McDaniels solely, apparently not recognizing that there was evaluation work which occurred beforehand that went into that decision.
I agree we may that we may decide to wait before adding DLs, assuming we do. There’s over a thousand players that will be cut after the Sept. 3 cut, according to reports of a final cutdown from 90 coming after that point.
Kidd and Kelley track veteran talent while Russell and McGill track college players (recent draftees). Either group may supply DTs that we’ll find intriguing at that point. As with the frenetic FA signing period, there will be a lot of names to choose from in a very short period of time.
Also, I agree that the current selections don’t necessarily represent a better group of candidates than what will be available. And the decision of adding, or not, will be contingent on who we find attractive. A veteran DT would provide short-term help whereas a younger player would help more for the long-term. It’s hard to predict who we’ll be interested in but younger vets would appear to have the inside track, if our recent history holds.
******* George Santayana described fanaticism as -- "redoubling your effort after you've forgotten your aim"
Wow slim
When Tim Tebow pissses into the wind, the wind changes direction.
by Albuquerque on Aug 17, 2011 10:27 PM MDT via mobile reply actions
Wow slim pickings
Chris Baker looks like the best option on the list.
When Tim Tebow pissses into the wind, the wind changes direction.
by Albuquerque on Aug 17, 2011 10:29 PM MDT via mobile reply actions
Baker is one of the biggest and youngest, and he's been here before.
I think that John Fox can do what McDaniels couldn’t with this kid.
I don't like FA DT's over the age of 30
but I wouldn’t mind us bringing in Stroud, Williams, or Kennedy for cheap 1-2 year deals.
As for young players, Parker is the only name I’m really interested in. Vance Walker is another guy who could be a good pickup and I remember liking Talavou as well.
And now for something completely different
Should mention either Pat or Jamal Williams would be okay with me
And now for something completely different
by AlbertaBronc on Aug 18, 2011 10:44 AM MDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Mile High Report
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Getting Social With MHR
Web Stuff
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Things to know about NFL men who served in WWII, Korea, and Vietnam
- How Kyle Orton almost cost the Colts Andrew Luck
- Detroit Lions DT Nick Fairley arrested again; now has more NFL arrests than NFL sacks
- Former high-school star Brian Banks does serious time on trumped-up charge, now hopes for an NFL shot
- Former ‘idiot kicker’ Mike Vanderjagt in trouble after accosting junior-high heckler
