Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DJ Back to Mike?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by stnzed View Post
    That's a valid point, but you're talking about a position that relies heavily on five 300+lbers keeping him as clean as possible, sooner or later teams can and will go right at Woodyard.

    32 teams refused to draft Woodyard because of nothing else but his size limitations, including the Broncos, there is definitely something to that.

    I see what Woodard is doing on the field, I just don't get carried away with it because I've seen Gold make the same impact off the bench before becoming a very overrated NFL starter.

    Nothing at all against Wesley Woodyard, but this is a valid concern, whether Broncos fans want to admit it or not.

    And what I mean by mistake is that Shanahan insists on building teams in this Mini-Me Image and it continues to ultimately fail, and with 250lb DE's to go along with that 212lb LB, it's not hard to envision this failing too.......
    Nothing here I don't agree with... for the long run. Although we know Ian was terrible his last year, and weak the year bfore his last year, he was a pretty decent starter before that. So although I'm not a Ian Gold backer.... I have to be honest about that fact.

    But you are right. There is no doubt that Woodyard is playing with fewer cards in his favor.. but at the same time, we thought the same thing about Royal, DeSean Jackson...Steve Smith... Jones... and Dumervile (and those are just off the top of my head).

    Like you said... shanahan didn't draft him.. but after being forced to use him due to injuries, we found a PLAYER. As you know, finding a player is much more important than one that fits the stereotypical size and hight meters.

    Seems Woodyard would be a decent SS... but I think we've seen that kind of talk all season long. Who knows for next season. Add 20-25 Lbs on him, and he''ll be fine. But then, we have said the same thing about Moss, and although I believe Moss is really picking it up, still needs to add to the weight.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Accordngs View Post
      I don't get where this keeps coming from.

      Why does everyone keep saying DJ hated playing middle? I would or sworn I remember him being just fine with it and never complaining.

      Does anyone have any links to this.
      yeah DJ actually said i think around week 7 that he was getting the hang of playing the middle and that he was getting more comfortable with it and starting to play on instinct instead of thinking .

      Comment


      • #33
        Well, I take both Mindfield and Ravage seriously, and I think both are great posters. Maybe I'm nuts.


        I will say this though on the current debate, and it's just my opinion:

        1) DJ Williams struggled at first and then was *awesome* in the middle by the end of the year. We moved him because Ian Gold became the team's scapegoat and retired, and we had absolutely NOBODY to play WILL, while we had a natural MIKE in Nate Webster and we thought we signed a bargain basement stud at MIKE in Niko Koutividies. We had to play DJ at WILL no matter what, we did not have any other options.

        We all know stats are not everything, but DJ's pure stats at MIKE last year were mind-boggling for a 1st time player.


        2) Shanahan loves undersized WILL's that excel in coverage with their speed. Wesley Woodyard is Ian Gold part II. Perhaps Gold lost some of his ability as time wore on, but early in his career before a serious injury, he was a stud at WILL. And he played exactly like Woodyard. Started off as a special teams demon (Pro Bowl even) and became an excellent WILL. Say what you will about late career Gold, early career Gold-Wilson-Mobley was considered the best LB trio in the NFL, and at times, were on pace to record setting defensive seasons. Dismissing Woodyard because of his size, in our type of scheme, is just silliness.


        3) DJ Williams was great at SAM. But, SAM is the least important position. I agree that his talent would be wasted there.


        4) Both of you numbnuts are intelligent and hit more then you miss. Just like the rest of us. If I really had to take a side, I'd agree more with Ravage here, but I've long been a supporter of DJ Williams as a MIKE, as far back as when he was a draft prospect, so I might have a bias. But, I believe DJ will be a Pro Bowl MIKE, Woodyard could potentially be a Pro Bowl WILL, and who really cares who the SAM is, they're only going to play on run downs anyway.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Ravage!!! View Post
          You are cute when you get your hair all ruffled up. Polumbus "prediction" was just a recent one that I remembered off the top of my head. Trust me, Mindfield... no one takes you seriously.

          You think that being critical makes you 'realistic.' You are trying to suggest that its better to put DJ back at strong-side instead of middle or weak, thats HORSECRAP.... and thus why its not going to happen. Probably why you continue to show that YOU dont' know what you are talking about.

          I never .. NEVER... said DJ was another Al Wilson. I said that because of the personnel on the team RIGHT NOW.. it absolutely makes sense to put DJ on the middle OVER Nate Webster.... thus keeping Woodyard on the weakside.

          If you think Winborn is somehow better than Webster on strong... well again.... I think you ahe shown that your evaluation of talent isn't exactly known to be on the ball. But neither one excites me one bit. So on the strong-side it doesn't really make a difference to me if its Webster or Winborn....

          Personally... I wanted to keep DJ at WILL where he was playing at a pro-bowl level. But that wouldn't exactly benefit the team nor would it take advantage of the players we DO have on the roster. DJ is better than Webster.

          Look at my posts throughout the season. The FIRST position I've said we needed to draft was a MLB. Thats never wavered. But DJ on the strong-side is a complete and TOTAL waste of the best talent you have on the team..... PERIOD.
          I think YOU take me seriously, Ravage, which is why you reply to my posts almost as soon as I type them...

          The fact that you do not understand that the strongside LB position IS important, and that virtually 'anyone' can do it tells me all I need to know about your understanding of the game.

          But hey, apparently the Broncos agree with you, which is why they would even THINK about returning to what was a putrid defensive personnel alignment a year ago.

          But what do I know, right?

          I mean, this IS the Denver Broncos themselves, after all, that have proven what they know about Defense, as they consistently rank in the lower four or five defenses in the entire NFL with personnel moves like these...but there is Ol' Ravage, ready, willing and able to agree with them whole hearteldy:salute!:

          So what I know about Winborn vs Webster has been shown by the RESULTS of the teams defensive play, which was horrible with Webster, and at times, quite improved with Winborn...but I know, don't let the facts get in the way of a good story, right?

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by MindField View Post
            The fact that you do not understand that the strongside LB position IS important, and that virtually 'anyone' can do it tells me all I need to know about your understanding of the game.
            Not important? No.. I said it takes the least talented of LBs to handle the SLB than any other, and I COMPLETELY stick with that statement. It is MUCH easier to find someone to take over and play the SLB, and play it well, than any other position on the defense. So is it important, of course. But its the easiest to fill.


            But what do I know, right?
            Right


            So what I know about Winborn vs Webster has been shown by the RESULTS of the teams defensive play, which was horrible with Webster, and at times, quite improved with Winborn...but I know, don't let the facts get in the way of a good story, right?
            These "facts" dont' support you at ALLL. FOr I could say the same thing about Champ Bailey. We MUST be better without Champ, and Paymah, Fox, or whomever is opposite of Bly, MUST be better than Champ because our defense has been playing better since Champ has been hurt. Even though that STUPID fact supports my statement, its STUPID to actually believe the statement is FACT.

            It makes NO SENSE to say that Winborn is better than Webster, because while Webster was out (as well as the rest of the starting LBs) from the MLB position, Winborn (who was filling in at the SLB position) and the rest of the defense played better. Thats absurd. Thats not even logical.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Mat'hir Uth Gan View Post
              Well, I take both Mindfield and Ravage seriously, and I think both are great posters. Maybe I'm nuts.


              I will say this though on the current debate, and it's just my opinion:

              1) DJ Williams struggled at first and then was *awesome* in the middle by the end of the year. We moved him because Ian Gold became the team's scapegoat and retired, and we had absolutely NOBODY to play WILL, while we had a natural MIKE in Nate Webster and we thought we signed a bargain basement stud at MIKE in Niko Koutividies. We had to play DJ at WILL no matter what, we did not have any other options.

              We all know stats are not everything, but DJ's pure stats at MIKE last year were mind-boggling for a 1st time player.


              2) Shanahan loves undersized WILL's that excel in coverage with their speed. Wesley Woodyard is Ian Gold part II. Perhaps Gold lost some of his ability as time wore on, but early in his career before a serious injury, he was a stud at WILL. And he played exactly like Woodyard. Started off as a special teams demon (Pro Bowl even) and became an excellent WILL. Say what you will about late career Gold, early career Gold-Wilson-Mobley was considered the best LB trio in the NFL, and at times, were on pace to record setting defensive seasons. Dismissing Woodyard because of his size, in our type of scheme, is just silliness.


              3) DJ Williams was great at SAM. But, SAM is the least important position. I agree that his talent would be wasted there.


              4) Both of you numbnuts are intelligent and hit more then you miss. Just like the rest of us. If I really had to take a side, I'd agree more with Ravage here, but I've long been a supporter of DJ Williams as a MIKE, as far back as when he was a draft prospect, so I might have a bias. But, I believe DJ will be a Pro Bowl MIKE, Woodyard could potentially be a Pro Bowl WILL, and who really cares who the SAM is, they're only going to play on run downs anyway.
              If they needed a WILL, why couldn't hey have signed one, or drafted it?

              Boss Bailey is built more like a WILL...

              IF DJ Williams can play the middle as he did in the KC road game last year, I would be fine with it, but come on, there were some games he straight up sucked last year, MUG.

              So which one will it be?

              I think that is the entire point about DJ Williams. He is just too inconsistent to be considered 'great' at any position. So I truly doubt he will be a perennial Pro Bowler anywhere.

              I understand this move would create a space for Wesley Woodyard, and I like the kid, but having small LB's like him is like having small O-linemen...it is not without liability.

              But hey, more than anyone else, you have clammored for this move, so I am sure you are happy with it.

              For me, the jury is out.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Ravage!!! View Post
                Not important? No.. I said it takes the least talented of LBs to handle the SLB than any other, and I COMPLETELY stick with that statement. It is MUCH easier to find someone to take over and play the SLB, and play it well, than any other position on the defense. So is it important, of course. But its the easiest to fill.



                Right



                These "facts" dont' support you at ALLL. FOr I could say the same thing about Champ Bailey. We MUST be better without Champ, and Paymah, Fox, or whomever is opposite of Bly, MUST be better than Champ because our defense has been playing better since Champ has been hurt. Even though that STUPID fact supports my statement, its STUPID to actually believe the statement is FACT.

                It makes NO SENSE to say that Winborn is better than Webster, because while Webster was out (as well as the rest of the starting LBs) from the MLB position, Winborn (who was filling in at the SLB position) and the rest of the defense played better. Thats absurd. Thats not even logical.
                How can it not be 'logical'????

                The defense was better when player A, B and C were playing, but they had NOTHING to do with the inmprovement?

                THAT statement in itself is stupid.

                If your 'logic' was true, Lou Gerig would have never kept his job when Wally Pipp returned to the lineup for all those great Yankees teams.

                Players make a name for themselves all the time in the NFL due to getting playing time due to injury.

                But then again, reality never has been your strong suit.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Mat'hir Uth Gan View Post
                  1) DJ Williams struggled at first and then was *awesome* in the middle by the end of the year. We moved him because Ian Gold became the team's scapegoat and retired, and we had absolutely NOBODY to play WILL, while we had a natural MIKE in Nate Webster and we thought we signed a bargain basement stud at MIKE in Niko Koutividies. We had to play DJ at WILL no matter what, we did not have any other options.
                  You said this so much better than my lame attempt.........

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by stnzed View Post
                    That's a valid point, but you're talking about a position that relies heavily on five 300+lbers keeping him as clean as possible, sooner or later teams can and will go right at Woodyard.

                    32 teams refused to draft Woodyard because of nothing else but his size limitations, including the Broncos, there is definitely something to that.

                    I see what Woodard is doing on the field, I just don't get carried away with it because I've seen Gold make the same impact off the bench before becoming a very overrated NFL starter.

                    Nothing at all against Wesley Woodyard, but this is a valid concern, whether Broncos fans want to admit it or not.

                    And what I mean by mistake is that Shanahan insists on building teams in this Mini-Me Image and it continues to ultimately fail, and with 250lb DE's to go along with that 212lb LB, it's not hard to envision this failing too.......
                    I see your concern with woodyard and his size, but you never really know how durable a player might be. Derrick Brooks, for example, is not much bigger than woodyard. I believe he is in the 220-230 range. He hasn't missed many games in his career, and based on his frame one would think otherwise. So the verdict is still out on woodyard, but time will tell.

                    I also see your position on the undersized defense. Using the light guys can work, if you use the tampa 2 scheme or something similar. Mathis from the colts played at about 220 a couple years ago, and he had success at DE. We just do not use our personnel right.
                    Adopted 2010 Bronco: Chris Kuper
                    Adopted 2011 Bronco: Brian Dawkins

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by broncsfan21 View Post
                      I see your concern with woodyard and his size, but you never really know how durable a player might be. Derrick Brooks, for example, is not much bigger than woodyard. I believe he is in the 220-230 range. He hasn't missed many games in his career, and based on his frame one would think otherwise. So the verdict is still out on woodyard, but time will tell.

                      I also see your position on the undersized defense. Using the light guys can work, if you use the tampa 2 scheme or something similar. Mathis from the colts played at about 220 a couple years ago, and he had success at DE. We just do not use our personnel right.
                      Derrick Brooks is listed at 6'0"-235...which is a great deal bigger than 6'1'-212.

                      The other thing is that the Indy defense is built for speed for play in their dome, on the carpet, on their fast track. They ALWAYS struggle against the run, and look at what happened to the Bucs last Monday night against the Panthers.

                      That was embarassing.

                      Personally, I would not want the Broncos defense to play like either team.
                      Last edited by MindField; 12-12-2008, 06:20 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by MindField View Post
                        How can it not be 'logical'????

                        The defense was better when player A, B and C were playing, but they had NOTHING to do with the inmprovement?

                        THAT statement in itself is stupid.

                        If this statement was true, Lou Gerig would have never kept his job when Wally Pipp returned to the lineup for all those great Yankees teams.

                        But then again, reality never has been your strong suit.
                        You stated that the defense was better because Winborn was playing SLB instead of Nate Webster playing MLB.

                        The same defense got better when Champ was out of the lineup. We both know that Champ's absence has not been better for the team...but the SAME facts back it up. Its NOT logical. Its NOT a A+B=C sequence of events, and thus the sequence that you point out does NOT support what you consider to be a fact. Its not a linear logical event.

                        **Example** A blue car drove by a guys house, and as the car drove by, the house caught on fire....thus.... Blue cars start house fires. Although the facts that were given are all true, they aren't related. Now I know this is an exaggeration, but it makes the point. We know that the defense has played better. But we can't say its Winborn's replacement of a different position over Webster instead of saying its Paymah's replacement of Bailey because both players were replaced (as well as several others) and the defense improved. Was it the different players, or was it an accumilation of many things? Probably the latter.
                        Last edited by Ravage!!!; 12-12-2008, 06:24 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Ravage!!! View Post
                          You stated that the defense was better because Winborn was playing SLB instead of Nate Webster playing MLB.

                          The same defense got better when Champ was out of the lineup. We both know that Champ's absence has not been better for the team...but the SAME facts back it up. Its NOT logical. Its NOT a A+B=C sequence of events, and thus the sequence that you point out does NOT support what you consider to be a fact. Its not a linear logical event.
                          lets stop defending webster your basically polishing a turd

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Mat'hir Uth Gan View Post

                            1) DJ Williams struggled at first and then was *awesome* in the middle by the end of the year. We moved him because Ian Gold became the team's scapegoat and retired, and we had absolutely NOBODY to play WILL, while we had a natural MIKE in Nate Webster and we thought we signed a bargain basement stud at MIKE in Niko Koutividies. We had to play DJ at WILL no matter what, we did not have any other options.
                            Bingo. That's what happened. But now with Woodyard, we can have Williams at MLB and Winborn at SLB. Who will say this is a weak set of LBs?
                            sigpic

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              I am not sure if I like the move (if it does happen)

                              BUT....I don't think DJ was bad at MIKE last year. I think he suffered from not having any DT's able to hold a block though....leaving him trying to fight too many 300lb linemen and chase down RB's. I feel with an extra year playing MIKE he would of gotten better...

                              as well as the somewhat improved play of our DT's this year. I do think Thomas/Robertson are an improvement over what we had going last year.


                              What I do like is the idea of having your 3 best players on the field though. It makes me cringe to think that Woodyard could be on the sideline. And that has nothing to do with DJ not being a stud himself at WLB...its just because Woodyard has been a huge impact player for us. The guy is averaging around 9 tackles a game..and most of them are solo tackles. He is just making big plays for us!

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Okay..okay....but how about

                                Niko at SS
                                Woodyard in the Middle
                                Webster at Will.

                                Huh? Huh?
                                sigpic

                                And THAT'S, the Cosmic Perspective.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X