Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

More cuts including Kircus...

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by Broncos72690 View Post
    Why won't they ever release Nate Jackson? He's been on the team for 3 years and I haven't seen him do anything.
    I've been wondering that myself. It seems like every time I turn around the guy is hurt. The one catch he had Sat. night he got up and looked a little gimpy. I was like "here we go again."

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Krugan View Post
      I dont think any of those you have listed a going to the PS, not qualified.

      Kircus was active most of last season, Cobbs cant, terrel is far gone.

      None of the above.
      yah, i know terell is not elligable, but why not kircus or cobbs? are they both in the same boat as terell? i kinda figured they were not on the list of guys that had two years on ps allready, or does being actice for some amount of time make you inelligable? not that it really matters either way i suppose

      ok, so im an idiot, but rockafellar posted the ps rules for me in another thread. all clear on it now. disregard my niave posts. although, i still think none of these guys,including lang will be missed.
      Last edited by Smith49; 08-27-2007, 04:12 PM.


      Dennis Smith/ my all-time favorite Denver Bronco.


      props to Snk16 for the sig!

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Anikai View Post
        Every person I met at Fan Fair this year, except Matt Lepsis has been cut....I'm starting to think I have bad joo-joo.....
        Do you think you can go meet Mike Bell too? That would be great.. thank you.
        The new website is about as ugly as Paris Hilton. Put the blue back!

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Smith49 View Post
          yah, i know terell is not elligable, but why not kircus or cobbs? are they both in the same boat as terell? i kinda figured they were not on the list of guys that had two years on ps allready, or does being actice for some amount of time make you inelligable? not that it really matters either way i suppose

          ok, so im an idiot, but rockafellar posted the ps rules for me in another thread. all clear on it now. disregard my niave posts. although, i still think none of these guys,including lang will be missed.
          No worries, with the bottom feeders of the team its hard to tell what they have left!!

          I think Lang will be missed, more in a locker room leader, than on the field.

          Kircus, meh, would rather see a Hixon stick, more upside.

          Cobbs, seemed solid last year. Not sure why he was brought in for a week, other than the off chance we needed him late in game 3.

          Im rambling.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Cugel View Post
            Lang never rose above #3 on the depth chart and didn't even play the last game. He doesn't play the run well and is small and lite. He's always been a pass-rush specialist, but Dumervil came along and does that better than Lang. So . . . . Dumervil's development made Lang expendable.

            Now it looks like Dumervil is starting, which means the team is satisfied with his run stopping ability. Moss will come in on passing downs to provide even more pass-rush ability. I imagine that Dumervil will switch over to the LE in place of Engleberger on passing downs and let Moss play the right.
            Lang started every game last year and he played well. I think with all the inexperience the Broncos have at DE and with Ecuban out they should have kept Lang. Good luck to him. Some team will pick him up.

            Comment


            • #36
              Sweet, just in time, I was getting hungry!

              Let's see, I'll have a Cold Cut Combo with pepperjack...

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by speardog View Post
                Lang started every game last year and he played well. I think with all the inexperience the Broncos have at DE and with Ecuban out they should have kept Lang. Good luck to him. Some team will pick him up.
                I agree, there must have been something about Lang this year the coaches didnt like. Seems to me with the lack of depth of the DLine you would at least keep a starter from last year but oh well...

                Comment


                • #38
                  I'm sure Subway is hiring so Kircus will have something to fall back on. Oh darn....did I say that?....I'm so sorry to all the Kircus lovers who get offended by that.... Subway is a fine establishment....I'm sure Kircus will make his way up to management....maybe even own one or two....Oops!.... Did I do it again?...Darn!!

                  As for Lang, it's a bit of a surprise that he wouldn't make it to the final cut. I figured he had a chance once Ekuban went down.

                  The others aren't a surprise at all.
                  My Opinion isn’t determined by what the Popular Opinion is. Sometimes I agree with the Majority, Sometimes I Don’t. If My Opinion is Different than Yours, I have to Ask One Question:
                  You Mad Bro?
                  Don’t Be A Mean Girl

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by speardog View Post
                    Lang started every game last year and he played well. I think with all the inexperience the Broncos have at DE and with Ecuban out they should have kept Lang. Good luck to him. Some team will pick him up.
                    If he "played well" he wouldn't have gotten cut, would he?

                    He lost his job to a better player who can play the run better than he can (which isn't saying much) and rush the passer better than he can.

                    And not, that wasn't just my opinion, it was Bates', and he saw Lang in practice every day.
                    sigpic

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Cugel View Post
                      If he "played well" he wouldn't have gotten cut, would he?

                      He lost his job to a better player who can play the run better than he can (which isn't saying much) and rush the passer better than he can.

                      And not, that wasn't just my opinion, it was Bates', and he saw Lang in practice every day.
                      For whatever reason, Lang fell out of favor long before trainig camp ever started. You could tell by the fact he was running with the third team as soon as camp opened. He was a starter last year, so what happened?.....my only deal is, if you are going to cut him, you better have a better option...and I still have a hard time believing John Engelberger is such a dramatically better player than Lang; sorry, but I just don't buy it.

                      As far as Kircus is concerned, I think his legal issue and the fact that Stokley seems to be doing well sealed his fate. Stokely better be able to contribute, or we have wasted an opportunity to develop a young player that could develop into a Brandon Stokley-type to keep an aging vet.

                      But what do I know? Shanahan hath spoken.
                      Last edited by MindField; 08-27-2007, 07:48 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by MindField View Post
                        For whatever reason, Lang fell out of favor long before trainig camp ever started. You could tell by the fact he was running with the third team as soon as camp opened. He was a starter last year, so what happened?.....my only deal is, if you are going to cut him, you better have a better option...and I still have a hard time believing John Engelberger is such a dramatically better player than Lang; sorry, but I just don't buy it.

                        As far as Kircus is concerned, I think his legal issue and the fact that Stokley seems to be doing well sealed his fate. Stokely better be able to contribute, or we have wasted an opportunity to develop a young player that could develop into a Brandon Stokley-type to keep an aging vet.

                        But what do I know? Shanahan hath spoken.
                        Beyond Kircus off field circus, he has been anything but consistant.

                        You cant lead me to believe, that you think Stokely wouldnt be an upgrade of Kircus?

                        1 year rental or not, Stokely is head and shoulders ahead of anywhere Kircus could get.

                        Added to that, if you leave a kircus, who do you drop? Hixon?

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Krugan View Post
                          Beyond Kircus off field circus, he has been anything but consistant.

                          You cant lead me to believe, that you think Stokely wouldnt be an upgrade of Kircus?

                          1 year rental or not, Stokely is head and shoulders ahead of anywhere Kircus could get.

                          Added to that, if you leave a kircus, who do you drop? Hixon?
                          If Stokley is the real deal and can be what you would expect from him by his name, then Kircus is the obvious guy to cut, because Kircus is essentially a poor man's Stokley....I just don't know that Kircus is a guy that should have been cut with the first round...I mean, they kept Quincy Morgan; what has he shown as a receiver in his time here?

                          Kircus was more productive than Morgan last year.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            I'll give you that.

                            Although I believe Morgan has shown more on a troubled special Teams.

                            Could be the reason why Morgan is hanging on by a thread.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by MindField View Post
                              ...I just don't know that Kircus is a guy that should have been cut with the first round...I mean, they kept Quincy Morgan; what has he shown as a receiver in his time here?

                              Kircus was more productive than Morgan last year.
                              I think the idea is that they're doing you a favor by cutting you early - allowing you more time to strike a deal with another team. Seems like the first list are vets that can land elsewhere.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                I am ok with all of these cuts. I think Kircus had to go, and our d-line is evolving such that these losses are not going to make a big difference- we are rebuilding that line now and we all have to get behind it. Unless there is a big acquisition, look for some ups and downs this season. Those guys were not going to be much better...we went with potential and the future as opposed to experience in this offseason.
                                Go Broncos, make me keep believing this year

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X