Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Krieger: Broncos lack real offensive weapon

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

  • #61
    Originally posted by topscribe View Post
    You've never heard of Jeff Legwold? Or Lindsay Jones? Mike Klis?

    Krieger makes sense some of the time, but if you place no credibility with any
    of the others, you are missing a lot.

    Writing is like anything else: A QB throws and INT once in a while; a writer
    falls on his face in a column or article. It happens.

    It happened this time.

    -----
    I should have said reasonable football columnist. Legwold was pretty decent at RMN, but at DP has mostly been relegated to the blogs. Klis is a columnist, but like Kizla and Paige (who atleast offers something by way of his unique writing style), he's thrown around some pretty weak and unsubstantiated opinions.

    Krieger, by contrast, focuses on specific things and is able to piece a reasonable argument for it. As the rest of my post suggested, that's exactly what I think he's done here in a very well-written piece.
    Hoping for a defensive-minded head coach and a return to the ZBS on offense. At the very least, no more cheaters for head coach.

    Comment


    • #62
      Well . . .

      Originally posted by AC1 View Post
      I should have said reasonable football columnist. Legwold was pretty decent at RMN, but at DP has mostly been relegated to the blogs. Klis is a columnist, but like Kizla and Paige (who atleast offers something by way of his unique writing style), he's thrown around some pretty weak and unsubstantiated opinions.

      Krieger, by contrast, focuses on specific things and is able to piece a reasonable argument for it. As the rest of my post suggested, that's exactly what I think he's done here in a very well-written piece.
      I will attest that Krieger's writing is often very insightful and worthy of reading
      regularly. Trouble is, he is very opinionated. Now, that makes him very interesting
      as a columnist, but it can also get him into factual binds. This is one of those
      times, IMO. But I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on it.


      Woody? As I said elsewhere, he's an idiot, but he's a lovable idiot. Kiszla, on
      the other hand, is just an idiot . . .

      -----

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by rogue719 View Post
        Actually, I thought the draft was about having a kind of lottery based upon your previous record to get new talent coming into the NFL out of college and having a fair chance to get the best talent available rather than watching the big market clubs with lots of money and the best record attracting all the talent away from the small clubs. Silly me.

        And value is relative. If Tebow busts, it wouldn't matter if he was a second round bust or a third round bust or a first round bust - it's still a pick that didn't pan out, cost the club money and could have been spent on someone who didn't bust (except amazingly, no one has yet come up with a good way to tell in advance who will bust and who won't).

        For example, if Tebow ends up starting next year and takes us to a 13-3 record and the Super Bowl, is he still not worth the value given up for him? Particularly since no one knows if the people we MIGHT have drafted with those picks we traded away would have bust?

        And if the Vikes were targeting Tebow it could possibly be because they don't know if Favre is coming back or not and they don't think Tavaris Jackson can take over the team.

        There are all kinds of possibilities and jumping to conclusions is a sure way to miss the most important ones.

        You remind me of one of my favorite things written by Mark Twain.

        "When I was fourteen, my father knew absolutely nothing. When I was 21, I was astounded at what the old man had learned in just seven years."
        There is no foolproof way to predict future value. The best you can do is gather a rough estimate of where a player will go, and what the "market value" for that player is. For example, Tyson Alaualu (sp?) was taken far earlier than expected. The Jags reached. Even if he becomes a great player, they could have had that great player later on in the draft. If he does become great, will taking him so early be disastrous? Of course not, but it wouldn't maximize the value.

        If you can have a great player in the 2nd round, there's no reason to take him in the 1st. Finding talent from the middle rounds is important, but if you jump at that talent and take it in the early rounds, it completely defeats the purpose of finding good value in the middle rounds.

        Tebow, of all players, is especially a reach. He has a much longer learning curve than most rookie QBs. He's the kind of player you take specifically if he falls into your lap, not the kind of player you trade up for. If he fell to us in the 2nd round, and we took him with one of the back to back 2nd round picks we originally had, it would have been a good pick. A value pick. Because if he busted, he would be one bust of three picks in the top 50. Not bad at all.

        By trading up for Tebow, we set ourselves up for failure if he fails. It's three wasted picks, not just one. Even if another team wanted to trade up and give up those picks, the smart move is to concede and let them have him. If there's a nice car that you like at an auction, but someone else is going to pay an unreasonably high price for it, the smart move is to let them have it. We payed an unreasonably high price for Tebow. If the Bills or Vikings wanted to reach for him and give up too much, we should have let them be the idiots, not stoop to their level and beyond.

        If Tebow fell to us, I would have been happy. We simply gave too much up. It wasn't a value pick. Like you said, you can't guess future value. You don't pay a higher price because of a guess. If Tebow goes on to be a star, it still wasn't a good value pick, because like you said no one knew his future value at the time of the pick. Of course, you won't hear me complaining, because I'll be thrilled to have a star QB no matter how we got him. But hopefully you understand my point.

        Comment


        • #64
          the cowboys lacked a real wr threat last year according to everyone but miles austin

          Comment


          • #65
            Oh come on. It's time to let go of the Marshall and Cutler situation. How long is he going to stay pissed about that?

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by topscribe View Post
              I will attest that Krieger's writing is often very insightful and worthy of reading
              regularly. Trouble is, he is very opinionated. Now, that makes him very interesting
              as a columnist, but it can also get him into factual binds. This is one of those
              times, IMO. But I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on it.


              Woody? As I said elsewhere, he's an idiot, but he's a lovable idiot. Kiszla, on
              the other hand, is just an idiot . . .

              -----
              Agree with everything (especially about Woody) except for the aforementioned disagreement

              Just curious - what parts of the article did you disagree with?
              Hoping for a defensive-minded head coach and a return to the ZBS on offense. At the very least, no more cheaters for head coach.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by AC1 View Post
                IMO Krieger, seemingly the only reasonable football writer at the Post, put together a very solid piece.

                He is speaking specifically about offensive playmakers. In that regard, Moreno is the closest thing we have a to a true playmaker. I would speculate (as Krieger does too) that either Thomas or Decker (or both) could blossom into one, but neither of them have played a single snap yet. Royal IMO is a playmaker, but the head coach and offensive co-ordinator have yet to show that they understand how to use him effectively.

                The McDaniels' fan-brigade is quick to react to anyone who dares question a head coach yet to coach his first playoff game. In this piece however, Krieger examines a specific aspect of one unit of the team. Many here, even those of us expecting the Broncos to make the playoffs, think we will do that on the strength of the defense together with a steady running game beind a strong offensive line. Let's put the pitchforks away.
                I am all for questioning a coach. I just don't feel like this article really needed to be written. So the Broncos lack a true playmaker on offense. Okay. That doesn't mean that they don't have talent on that side of the ball. McDaniels obviously is looking to these guys to step up. They haven't had that chance yet. To me the article just seemed like stating the obvious, and the unnecessary.
                http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/f...uff/hillis.gif

                Comment


                • #68
                  I'd say we have no offensive weapons either. I see nothing wrong with the article. Now once someone explodes onto the scene then we can talk but as of now.......we have some good players on offense(skilled positions)but no1 that u know that u have to worry about and that can be good or bad.
                  sigpic

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by owninit View Post
                    I don't agree with this, the offense has play makers.....you're just not going to hear about them on ESPN every hour.


                    Dallas has a "playmaker", in Dez, but did dez average over 25 YPC last year......nope, but DT did.


                    In college Decker droped THREE balls his entire career......


                    The point some of these guys were getting at is Austin in dallas "wasn't a playmaker" until this year?????.....BS he was a playmaker, just none of the MSM thought so becuase he wasn't featured on sports center.

                    Anyone watching a game new TD was special, but he wasn't covered as a "playmker" unit AFTER his 2000 yd season, when in fact he's been making a HUGE difference far before then.

                    Look at what gaffney did in the game marshal wasn't in, it would probably supprise you that he lead the team in YPC last year, even though he wasn't getting TD's....

                    Orton had 3700 yds and 21 TD's in his first year in McD's system, like him or not, it's going to be AT least that good this year, and that's better than Cassel, and KC was hailed for getting a "franchise QB", who's a difference maker.


                    The fact of the matter is that there are playmakers all over this team, and while ESPN doesn't cover them, they are there.

                    As for the o-line and having two rookie starter, it's not all that uncommon, especially in a power blocking scheme. You put a hat on a guy, and move him, it's not as complicated as somethings.



                    Simply being a debbie downer, doesn't make you any more knowledgable, or a "realist", look at the people and their produciton, not how much hype they get.

                    I understand your point and I am far from a debbie downer but look at the article as a realist.

                    Who are our play makers on paper? Going by last years stats the article is 100% accurate. We have nothing. Just accept it for what it is.

                    Now on the flip, someone on this team will step up during the season, I have no doubt about that, but if your going to weigh the entire season on Orton and Gafney being the playmakers, its going to be a long year.

                    Until proven on the field in an actual game, our rookies mean nothing on paper so the argument that Decker and Thomas are going to be the back bone of this team should be taken with a grain of salt until they actually put some stats up.

                    Eddie Royal, maybe? Last year Eddie was the incredible disappearing man. So people who say we still have Eddie are some what correct, Eddie is on the broncos roster, but what did he contribute on offense last year other then a major drop off from his rookie season? Until Eddie steps up and becomes a contributor on offense, he is NOT a play maker on this team.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by rst08tierney View Post
                      I understand your point and I am far from a debbie downer but look at the article as a realist.

                      Who are our play makers on paper? Going by last years stats the article is 100% accurate. We have nothing. Just accept it for what it is.

                      Now on the flip, someone on this team will step up during the season, I have no doubt about that, but if your going to weigh the entire season on Orton and Gafney being the playmakers, its going to be a long year.

                      Until proven on the field in an actual game, our rookies mean nothing on paper so the argument that Decker and Thomas are going to be the back bone of this team should be taken with a grain of salt until they actually put some stats up.

                      Eddie Royal, maybe? Last year Eddie was the incredible disappearing man. So people who say we still have Eddie are some what correct, Eddie is on the broncos roster, but what did he contribute on offense last year other then a major drop off from his rookie season? Until Eddie steps up and becomes a contributor on offense, he is NOT a play maker on this team.
                      I'm sure the defensive coordinator of Cincy is going to say:

                      ......"Just play soft zone, hell they don't have anyone i've heard about on ESPN......"


                      Nope no playmakers here, look at the roster, and hand us the win.....

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Our offensive weapon is Kyle Orton. That master of the dink and dunk.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          I personally hope our lack of a weapon is our greatest strength, where the other team expects no playmakers, and BOOM! They let down their guard and plays are made!
                          sigpic

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Why do so many fans here need a tissue and a hug after an honest article on the team is written and they dont agree with the views of the author.

                            Reality is VERY hard to swallow at times but I would rather live in the real world then pretend this team is going some where come January.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by rst08tierney View Post
                              Why do so many fans here need a tissue and a hug after an honest article on the team is written and they dont agree with the views of the author.

                              Reality is VERY hard to swallow at times but I would rather live in the real world then pretend this team is going some where come January.
                              Couldn't agree more.... some people are so disillusioned about this team. Just looking at this title my first thought was...."well no kidding" for the last 3 years we have had 2 offensive weapons....now they are both traded..... All we have is a rb that has potential, a project wr, eddie royal and jabar gaffney.... Yeah I don't think that there is an NFL team that is weaker across the skill positions than us, especially with #27 having a bum wheel
                              Thanx Blondie79 for the sweet Sig....Love it and I will rock it with pridesigpic

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Ya I would have to agree with this statement. Nobody on the offense would really "scare" me if I liked another team playing against the Broncos if you looked at it that way. I do however really like this defense, and I think they can keep us in many games to give our offense enough chances to make something happen.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X