Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Garner?

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

  • #16
    Re: Garner?

    Originally posted by rascal
    Well all those discussions about QG being the starter and debating if he could succeed might be mute. According to the Denver Post the Broncos are actively pursuing Charlie Garner of the Oakland Raiders and he is suppose to visit next week apparently. Interesting.
    i still take dillion any day insted of Garner

    Comment


    • #17
      Garner is to old I'd take Alexander or Thomas and if all else fails we ca get Dillion other then that get me another RB in the draft.
      sigpic
      PSN & XBL: Vicious2500
      You Shed Tears of Scarlet

      Comment


      • #18
        I'd have to agree that if we do take him, it should be a short term contract with incentive laden bonuses structured into the salary based on his performance. He's old, and broken imho.

        I'd prefer we pick up a younger FA RB and use the RBBC during camp and pre-season to determine who deserves to be starting behind the best run blocking O-line in the game.

        Note: Didn't Mike Anderson agree to stay with Denver ONLY if he was afforded the opportunity to compete for the starting position? Not for nothing, but he signed and has proven himself capable. Why should we even be looking for another RB considering we have one veteran and a few rookies? IMHO, we need to go shopping for a tested FB to bust open holes for whomever starts.

        Nuff said...

        Not as lean & Not as mean.. but damn proud to claim the title of (former) U.S. Marine
        ~DBMAdsf Llaus @T m0 P^~

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by DPg2003
          Having Garner for two years would give the young RB's we already have more time to develop. If he came here and had two, may three good years he could give Q, Galloway, and maybe even Sapp time to develop into great backs, or he could stunt their growth by taking away their PT.
          i guess i'm thinking the latter is more likely. the thing is, portis didn't need any time to develop and while i think it is unlikely we'll draft another portis right away (i'm largely ignorant of this year's draft however) it seems to me that RB's just don't last long enough to give them 2-3 years developing time.
          sigpic
          go broncos
          share the sidewalk
          liberty > safety . . . ron paul '12!

          Comment


          • #20
            here's my opinion: Garner has shown alot of potential to be similar to LT and Marshall Faulk, in that he can be a great reciever out of the backfield. 2 years ago he caught 90 balls and rushed for almost a 1000 yards. at 32, he's not too old yet, and he could be a good mentor for QG and/or Galloway.

            However, I think I actually agree with dhall26 here, in that the A-Train might be a potential Priest Holmes pickup. 1/2 of the running backs in this league only need a decent line to show that the're good...I've seen Thomas run very well and I think he'd do well in denver.

            I DON'T want Dillon...he's a crybaby and he's got an attitude that we don't need. The second he doesn't get as many carries as CP did, he'll start complaining. We dont' need that.

            Comment


            • #21
              I like Gardner...he would do welll in this offense since he's already been part of the west coast offense.


              Have a question for me? "Ask AO" A Non-Feedback Thread. You'll be glad you did!

              2003, 2009 Fantasy League Champion!
              2006, 2010 Fantasy League Runner-up

              Comment

              Working...
              X