Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 11 LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 164
  1. #121
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,225
    I would love to see Andy Janovich blocking for Lil Mac, Janovich just needs to get Lil Mac past that first blocker to give him space to do his thing and that could lead to a lot of medium to long runs, especially if the WRs block well too. Then bring CJ in the 4th quarter to just wear down the opponent.
    Denver Broncos 2015 - Win AFC West Division: , Win AFC Conference: , Beat SB 49 Champs (2X): , Win SB 50:

  2. #122
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,225
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich_C View Post
    Just curious but would yo, if you were in John Elway's shoes trade our 1st, 2nd and perhaps even another pick to simply nab MCCaffrey at pick 11?
    But what if we need to get higher? Could Titans at #5 use Lil Mac? Could the Bills take him if he is available? Probably. If the Bills took, I would then pull an Elway and demand a trade. At least we know he wouldn't go to the Patriots, the Bills would never do that. They might not even trade to the Broncos, but it would make for great drama!!

    You could always swing a deal with the Jets or Bills for Paxton and a 3rd rounder. It would basically be a trade for Paxton for Lil Mac.
    Last edited by haciendadad; 04-17-2017 at 08:16 PM.
    Denver Broncos 2015 - Win AFC West Division: , Win AFC Conference: , Beat SB 49 Champs (2X): , Win SB 50:

  3. #123
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,225
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich_C View Post
    See I wouldn't be upset if we nabbed him at 20 but to trade away a 2nd round for a guy who never really mastered any one skill at the college level is just insane to me.

    Now I do want to ensure that you and others who are of the same opinion of you understand something. I see McCaffrey as a special player but at the same time like with any special player there is a risk reward...for me I see that sweet spot being pick 20 through to the very early 2nd round. Trading away our top two picks for one player - imo makes no sense especially when we have so many other needs. Then there is the risk of injury. After all he did enter into draft season less than 100 percent. So even if we were to draft him we'd still need to keep someone like Raymond as a WR/return guy and keep McCaffrey as either his backup there or visa versa.
    Injuries could happen to anyone at anytime.

    I agree we have multiple needs, but some might argue that you get a player that can play multiple positions. I know it sounds kinda crazy, but the fact is he can play multiple positions and at a high level.

    example quote from BleacherReport

    McCaffrey's versatility makes him particularly compelling, as he's not only an excellent runner but also a fantastic receiver.

    "I think he's the best route runner in the draft, and I include all wide receivers, tight ends, H-backs, whatever you wanna pick," NFL Network draft analyst Charles Davis told Joe DeCamara and Jon Ritchie of the 94WIP Midday Show (h/t Andrew Porter of CBS Philly). "... The way he caught the ball in the combine was so scary good.

    "I think he's the most complete back in the draft," he added. "The way we run the ball in the NFL now—there are less [fullbacks] running around in front of people that clear the way. And you have to find your own way, so we do it more of a space game. And that's what Christian does as well as anyone in this draft."
    Denver Broncos 2015 - Win AFC West Division: , Win AFC Conference: , Beat SB 49 Champs (2X): , Win SB 50:

  4. #124
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Smolan, Kansas, United States
    Posts
    22,045
    Everyone is balking at the idea of giving up a second. Who worthwhile have we drafted in the second in recent years?

    Adam Gotsis, Ty Sambrailo, Cody Latimer, Montee Ball, Derek Wolfe (the one bright spot) Brock Osweiler, Rahim Moore, Zane Beadles...

    I mean...are we really going to miss that second round pick with our fantastic track record of drafting players in the second?


  5. #125
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Ft. Lewis, Washington
    Posts
    3,164
    Quote Originally Posted by Freyaka View Post
    Everyone is balking at the idea of giving up a second. Who worthwhile have we drafted in the second in recent years?

    Adam Gotsis, Ty Sambrailo, Cody Latimer, Montee Ball, Derek Wolfe (the one bright spot) Brock Osweiler, Rahim Moore, Zane Beadles...

    I mean...are we really going to miss that second round pick with our fantastic track record of drafting players in the second?
    This is a good point, we due tend to reach or just flat out miss in the 2nd round...but I think it is more principle of giving up that much for a RB/WR. I am one of McCaffrey's biggest fans....and NO, it is not due to his last name. I honestly think that drafting a utility player coming out of the backfield can mask our terrible Oline. I know many on here think that drafting a OT(or Forrest Lamp) in the first somehow automatically fixes our OL problem...when most first round T's don't end up becoming serviceable till year 2-3.

    BUT...trading our 2nd to move up to get him is just not a smart move in my opinion. I think we need to pick for DL, LB or OL...all depending on who we go in the first of course.
    New England Patriots GM

  6. #126
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    8,551
    Quote Originally Posted by Freyaka View Post
    Everyone is balking at the idea of giving up a second. Who worthwhile have we drafted in the second in recent years?

    Adam Gotsis, Ty Sambrailo, Cody Latimer, Montee Ball, Derek Wolfe (the one bright spot) Brock Osweiler, Rahim Moore, Zane Beadles...

    I mean...are we really going to miss that second round pick with our fantastic track record of drafting players in the second?
    Even a blind squirrel finds a nut eventually....

    Seriously though, I wouldn't give that much up for a gadget/utility player. That's just me though. Now if you are talking giving that up for someone like Foster, Mike Williams, Fournette, or a top QB (not this year) then fine. I just am not a fan of a gadget player in the 1st. I wouldn't be to upset if we pick him, but I would go elsewhere.

  7. #127
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    3,998
    So is the new dismissive term going to be "gadget player"?

    First it was "Jack of all trades, master of none". Then it was only his last name that placed him in the top half of the first round. Now this?

    IMO McCaffrey has moved out of the Broncos reasonable range. (You know all those teams in the top 20 that love his Dad so much). But if for some reason McCoy and Elway do see the value in trading up for him I am all for it.

    Instead of trying to put a disparaging label on the young man. Or continue to compare him to others. I just envision how he would be used in creative ways for this Bronco offense. The 1st downs, the Red Zone, the pass routes, the elusiveness, the returns, a safety valve for a young QB, the middle of the field.usage. He becomes a player the opposing defenses have to be accountable for on every play he is in the game. Not expecting him to be an every down back or a consistent between the tackles runner. Use him correctly and he is a impact player. choose to make him just another RB and it is a wasted pick. I will give McCoy the benefit of doubt that he will use him in a variety of ways.

    New Coordinator, new system and hopefully some new creativity in the offense this year.

    I was supportive of the Kubiak hire. but his offense never worked. The players changed but the production was consistently bad. I am expecting that to change this year. Getting some explosiveness out of the RB position would go a long way to correcting the issues. I like Anderson, Booker and Janovich. All have roles. All can contribute. But a RB like McCaffrey (or Cook) as a home run type playmaker changes the game. If both are drafted before the Broncos then I hope some of you are correct in assuming that "there are similar skilled players later in the draft." And the Broncos find one..

  8. #128
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Ft. Lewis, Washington
    Posts
    3,164
    Quote Originally Posted by FR Tim View Post
    So is the new dismissive term going to be "gadget player"?

    First it was "Jack of all trades, master of none". Then it was only his last name that placed him in the top half of the first round. Now this?

    IMO McCaffrey has moved out of the Broncos reasonable range. (You know all those teams in the top 20 that love his Dad so much). But if for some reason McCoy and Elway do see the value in trading up for him I am all for it.

    Instead of trying to put a disparaging label on the young man. Or continue to compare him to others. I just envision how he would be used in creative ways for this Bronco offense. The 1st downs, the Red Zone, the pass routes, the elusiveness, the returns, a safety valve for a young QB, the middle of the field.usage. He becomes a player the opposing defenses have to be accountable for on every play he is in the game. Not expecting him to be an every down back or a consistent between the tackles runner. Use him correctly and he is a impact player. choose to make him just another RB and it is a wasted pick. I will give McCoy the benefit of doubt that he will use him in a variety of ways.

    New Coordinator, new system and hopefully some new creativity in the offense this year.

    I was supportive of the Kubiak hire. but his offense never worked. The players changed but the production was consistently bad. I am expecting that to change this year. Getting some explosiveness out of the RB position would go a long way to correcting the issues. I like Anderson, Booker and Janovich. All have roles. All can contribute. But a RB like McCaffrey (or Cook) as a home run type playmaker changes the game. If both are drafted before the Broncos then I hope some of you are correct in assuming that "there are similar skilled players later in the draft." And the Broncos find one..
    Great Post...Once I get to my actual CPU, I will CP you.
    New England Patriots GM

  9. #129
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    8,551
    Quote Originally Posted by FR Tim View Post
    So is the new dismissive term going to be "gadget player"?

    First it was "Jack of all trades, master of none". Then it was only his last name that placed him in the top half of the first round. Now this?

    IMO McCaffrey has moved out of the Broncos reasonable range. (You know all those teams in the top 20 that love his Dad so much). But if for some reason McCoy and Elway do see the value in trading up for him I am all for it.

    Instead of trying to put a disparaging label on the young man. Or continue to compare him to others. I just envision how he would be used in creative ways for this Bronco offense. The 1st downs, the Red Zone, the pass routes, the elusiveness, the returns, a safety valve for a young QB, the middle of the field.usage. He becomes a player the opposing defenses have to be accountable for on every play he is in the game. Not expecting him to be an every down back or a consistent between the tackles runner. Use him correctly and he is a impact player. choose to make him just another RB and it is a wasted pick. I will give McCoy the benefit of doubt that he will use him in a variety of ways.

    New Coordinator, new system and hopefully some new creativity in the offense this year.

    I was supportive of the Kubiak hire. but his offense never worked. The players changed but the production was consistently bad. I am expecting that to change this year. Getting some explosiveness out of the RB position would go a long way to correcting the issues. I like Anderson, Booker and Janovich. All have roles. All can contribute. But a RB like McCaffrey (or Cook) as a home run type playmaker changes the game. If both are drafted before the Broncos then I hope some of you are correct in assuming that "there are similar skilled players later in the draft." And the Broncos find one..
    Just because I labeled him as a gadget player doesn't mean anything. Labels are what they are... just words to describe someone. When you say use him in creative ways, that is the definition of gadget. It's not necessarily a bad thing.

    With that said, I just don't see the value in spending a first on a RB unless he is a full time guy at the RB position like a Elliott or Fournette. That's the kind of RB I would spend a first on.

  10. #130
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    where the hills touch heaven
    Posts
    12,608
    Quote Originally Posted by Atwnbroncfan View Post
    Im not saying people like him because of his name. I'm saying that his skills plus being from Bronco boodline push some people into the irrational fan boy club. We have never had a thread this long or this many arguments back and forth about a prospect PRE DRAFT. Not even the year we got Von.

    seems like if the fact some see him as a huge weapon of need, and believe that without a doubt he will be a huge asset to the struggling offense and ST..

    ruffles your feathers, you could always stay out of the thread

  11. #131
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Las Manzanitas, NM
    Posts
    27,065
    Quote Originally Posted by Freyaka View Post
    Everyone is balking at the idea of giving up a second. Who worthwhile have we drafted in the second in recent years?

    Adam Gotsis, Ty Sambrailo, Cody Latimer, Montee Ball, Derek Wolfe (the one bright spot) Brock Osweiler, Rahim Moore, Zane Beadles...

    I mean...are we really going to miss that second round pick with our fantastic track record of drafting players in the second?
    Are you saying that, based on the past, Denver should give up on using their second round pick and always use it to trade up/down or for a player?
    Last edited by samparnell; 04-18-2017 at 07:47 AM.
    "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

  12. #132
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Ft. Lewis, Washington
    Posts
    3,164
    Quote Originally Posted by samparnell View Post
    Are you saying that, based on the past, Denver should give up on using their second round pick and always use it to trade up?
    ....or down.
    New England Patriots GM

  13. #133
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    3,998
    Quote Originally Posted by FlowdaBroncoFan View Post
    Just because I labeled him as a gadget player doesn't mean anything. Labels are what they are... just words to describe someone. When you say use him in creative ways, that is the definition of gadget. It's not necessarily a bad thing.

    With that said, I just don't see the value in spending a first on a RB unless he is a full time guy at the RB position like a Elliott or Fournette. That's the kind of RB I would spend a first on.
    Of course words mean something. In sports they conveniently define a player in a positive or negative way depending on the point you are trying to make. How about "game manager" for a QB? Tends to be a negative, correct?

    When was the last time Sproles, Westbrook, Edelman , Bush, T. Coleman, or D. Lewis were called "gadget " players in a dismissive way? If used it is usually in the context of creative uses within an offense by the coaches. If used at all. Usually the positive term used is third down back or versatile. How about just calling Mccaffrey a very good football player and simply discuss the positives and negatives of his impact on the field.

    I understand that some do not see value in a RB in the first round in any year. It is a preference. No issues with that. I just disagree. Especially the way this offense has struggled and is currently constructed. Broncos need some playmaking in the backfield to open up the outside. And to take some pressure off the young QBs and sub-par oline. Perhaps if the Houston's and Mack's of the NFL had to acknowledge the man in motion or a explosive RB slipping into the flats they would not be able tee off and have career days.

    I understand the "need" for a OT. I just do not see any of the most discussed separating themselves from the players already on the roster. Whether in the draft or on the roster all the olineman are flawed but have talent. I prefer the new coaches figure out those flaws and talent from the roster first before adding more projects in the first couple rounds this year. 3rd or 4th no problem. First two picks need top be impact skill players IMO. Give me a RB, TE, ILB, pass rusher, CB or DT before any of the olineman.

    One of those impact players is Mccaffrey.

  14. #134
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Smolan, Kansas, United States
    Posts
    22,045
    Quote Originally Posted by samparnell View Post
    Are you saying that, based on the past, Denver should give up on using their second round pick and always use it to trade up/down or for a player?
    I'm just saying that if we use a second round pick to move up and pick CMAC, I won't complain because I haven't been impressed with the last decade of second round picks outside of Derek Wolfe.

    I'm not saying we just do this every year, but it is why I'm not complaining of we do it this year.


  15. #135
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    8,551
    Quote Originally Posted by FR Tim View Post
    Of course words mean something. In sports they conveniently define a player in a positive or negative way depending on the point you are trying to make. How about "game manager" for a QB? Tends to be a negative, correct?

    When was the last time Sproles, Westbrook, Edelman , Bush, T. Coleman, or D. Lewis were called "gadget " players in a dismissive way? If used it is usually in the context of creative uses within an offense by the coaches. If used at all. Usually the positive term used is third down back or versatile. How about just calling Mccaffrey a very good football player and simply discuss the positives and negatives of his impact on the field.

    I understand that some do not see value in a RB in the first round in any year. It is a preference. No issues with that. I just disagree. Especially the way this offense has struggled and is currently constructed. Broncos need some playmaking in the backfield to open up the outside. And to take some pressure off the young QBs and sub-par oline. Perhaps if the Houston's and Mack's of the NFL had to acknowledge the man in motion or a explosive RB slipping into the flats they would not be able tee off and have career days.

    I understand the "need" for a OT. I just do not see any of the most discussed separating themselves from the players already on the roster. Whether in the draft or on the roster all the olineman are flawed but have talent. I prefer the new coaches figure out those flaws and talent from the roster first before adding more projects in the first couple rounds this year. 3rd or 4th no problem. First two picks need top be impact skill players IMO. Give me a RB, TE, ILB, pass rusher, CB or DT before any of the olineman.

    One of those impact players is Mccaffrey.
    I'm not ignorant to the fact that we lack "play makers" on offense. Yes we need one or more. But I still think we can get one in the 2nd and keep our 1st for a more impact full player. I don't think we should take on OT for the sake of need. I just think a player like Lamp, Foster, Mike Williams, etc would be more impact full. Then we could come back in the 2nd and take Kamara who, IMO, is very similar to McCaffrey.

    I guess I just don't see the reason for the level of love for McCaffrey as others do. He is flying up boards, and I don't want to mortgage the future for a player I think isn't as impact full as the likes of Foster.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •