Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Broncos Add New FB & Waive Rookie TE

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

  • Broncos Add New FB & Waive Rookie TE

    To make room for Opurum, the Broncos waived rookie TE Anthony Norris.
    Toben Opurum

    ENGLEWOOD, Colo. -- The Broncos fortified their fullback corps Tuesday when they were awarded Toben Opurum off waivers from the New Orleans Saints.

    In a corresponding move, the team waived tight end Anthony Norris.

    A product of Kansas, the 6-foot-1, 250-pound Opurum spent the 2013 season on the Chiefs' practice squad before being claimed by the Houston Texans for their 53-man roster on Dec. 24 of that year. He did not play any regular-season snaps for the Texans, and was on their practice squad in 2014 for a month.

    The 25-year-old Opurum joined the Saints on Dec. 11, 2014 as a practice-squad member, and spent most of the 2015 season on their practice squad before receiving a Dec. 16 promotion to the 53-man roster. He played two games for the Saints last year, but did not record a carry; all of his work came on special teams.

    A two-time team captain at Kansas, Opurum was an outside linebacker for the Jayhawks before being converted to fullback as a pro.
    Link: http://www.denverbroncos.com/news-an...e-bf3a68da84d1

    For me I see this as an very interesting move. There have been a few different threads on the TE position and this move for me says that our coaching staff look to be pretty zoned in on that position group and likely already have certain guys in mind for certain positions. What really caught my eye was that despite us clearly carrying a FB this year Garner was not waived. So that says that the team likes him.

    Thoughts?

  • #2
    Opurum has some experience, so it is possible he might start out on first team in TC. Garner is PS eligible, if I'm not mistaken.

    With Norris' release, Denver has four TEs: Virgil Green, Jeff Heuerman, Garrett Graham and Henry Krieger-Coble.

    Denver is now at least three deep at all offensive and defensive positions.

    It sounds like Kubiak and Dennison are determined to have FBs and to use the I and other two Back formations often. That may mean two FBs will make the roster.
    "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by samparnell View Post
      Opurum has some experience, so it is possible he might start out on first team in TC. Garner is PS eligible, if I'm not mistaken.

      With Norris' release, Denver has four TEs: Virgil Green, Jeff Heuerman, Garrett Graham and Henry Krieger-Coble.

      Denver is now at least three deep at all offensive and defensive positions.

      It sounds like Kubiak and Dennison are determined to have FBs and to use the I and other two Back formations often. That may mean two FBs will make the roster.
      Right- and I agree. SO will it be two FB's (true FB's) or 1 FB and 1 FB/TE or FB/RB instead? Kubiak in the past favors the former

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by samparnell View Post
        Opurum has some experience, so it is possible he might start out on first team in TC. Garner is PS eligible, if I'm not mistaken.

        With Norris' release, Denver has four TEs: Virgil Green, Jeff Heuerman, Garrett Graham and Henry Krieger-Coble.

        Denver is now at least three deep at all offensive and defensive positions.

        It sounds like Kubiak and Dennison are determined to have FBs and to use the I and other two Back formations often. That may mean two FBs will make the roster.

        I think it is going to be two FB's and four TE's. And then go 3TE/1FB on game day. I wonder if Garner now pushes both groups in TC.
        Adopt-A-Bronco: Kendell Hinton

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by listopencil View Post
          I think it is going to be two FB's and four TE's. And then go 3TE/1FB on game day. I wonder if Garner now pushes both groups in TC.
          In a game, in order to implement the game plan, there must be depth. If the game plan calls for a lot of I Formation, there must be two FBs active as a contingency plan.

          Most of the I Formations (i.e., Pro, Twins, Slot, Wing, Power) need one TE. In the interest of depth, it might be better to have two FBs and two TEs rather than have no depth at FB.

          The FBs and TEs will likely be on the four main STs (KO, KOR, P, PR)

          Denver currently has four TEs. If your prediction turns out, it could be that the four are already on the team.

          Graham played some FB/H-Back in Houston under Kubiak before. Garner has played TE at Pitt, and is PS eligible, I believe.
          "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by listopencil View Post
            I think it is going to be two FB's and four TE's. And then go 3TE/1FB on game day. I wonder if Garner now pushes both groups in TC.
            I highly doubt they commit 6 roster spots to TE and FB. 5 is the limit, imo.
            sigpic

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by samparnell View Post
              In a game, in order to implement the game plan, there must be depth. If the game plan calls for a lot of I Formation, there must be two FBs active as a contingency plan.

              Most of the I Formations (i.e., Pro, Twins, Slot, Wing, Power) need one TE. In the interest of depth, it might be better to have two FBs and two TEs rather than have no depth at FB.

              The FBs and TEs will likely be on the four main STs (KO, KOR, P, PR)

              Denver currently has four TEs. If your prediction turns out, it could be that the four are already on the team.

              Graham played some FB/H-Back in Houston under Kubiak before. Garner has played TE at Pitt, and is PS eligible, I believe.
              Anyone who wants a real game example of this see our last game vs Seattle in the regular season.

              Green was going to have a major role in the offense. He was lining up at TE and FB that game. Iirc he had a rushing carry. He suffered a injury and I remember in a couple pressers talk of how it was a setback to the gameplan he got hurt.

              Like Sam said need depth if we want to be able to count on our game plan.
              Time to build on the win and grow the team from some solid play higher level of play

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by samparnell View Post
                In a game, in order to implement the game plan, there must be depth. If the game plan calls for a lot of I Formation, there must be two FBs active as a contingency plan.

                Most of the I Formations (i.e., Pro, Twins, Slot, Wing, Power) need one TE. In the interest of depth, it might be better to have two FBs and two TEs rather than have no depth at FB.

                The FBs and TEs will likely be on the four main STs (KO, KOR, P, PR)

                Denver currently has four TEs. If your prediction turns out, it could be that the four are already on the team.

                Graham played some FB/H-Back in Houston under Kubiak before. Garner has played TE at Pitt, and is PS eligible, I believe.
                While I agree Garner is PS eligible and Graham played some FB/h-Back for Kubiak I question why he is not listed the same way Casey was on the roster....TE/FB. And if I can take this one step further this is why I think, personally, that the rela competition is for the other TE spot and I see that between Krieger-Coble, Henry & Garrett Graham

                Originally posted by broncos SB2010 View Post
                I highly doubt they commit 6 roster spots to TE and FB. 5 is the limit, imo.

                That is why listopencil and I have mentioned Garner a fair amount. He allows for depth in both position groups while only taking up 1 roster spot. James Casey had the same designation as garner last year and Casey made the initial 53.
                Last edited by Rich_C; 05-11-2016, 06:29 AM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by broncos SB2010 View Post
                  I highly doubt they commit 6 roster spots to TE and FB. 5 is the limit, imo.
                  That could be. Part of the decision will depend on how often they plan to use 21 personnel formations, and if there are any plans for 22 personnel formations.

                  There can be a certain amount of overlap between the TEs and FBs. Graham played some FB/H-back in Houston before. Garner played TE/WR and H-Back at Pitt.

                  Most of the I/offset I Formations have X (Split End), Y (Tight End), Z (Flanker), 20 (Fullback) and 30 (Tailback). If four Ys is too many, what is the correct amount of Xs and Zs? Would five WRs be enough?

                  3 QBs + 2 FBs + 3 TBs + 3 TEs + 5 WRs + 9 OL = 25 is one possibility. Or, 8 OL and 6 WR. Or, 8 OL and 4 TE. Or, 8 OL and 4 TB.
                  "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Rich_C View Post
                    While I agree Garner is PS eligible and Graham played some FB/h-Back for Kubiak I question why he is not listed the same way Casey was on the roster....TE/FB. And if I can take this one step further this is why I think, personally, that the rela competition is for the other TE spot and I see that between Krieger-Coble, Henry & Garrett Graham




                    That is why listopencil and I have mentioned Garner a fair amount. He allows for depth in both position groups while only taking up 1 roster spot. James Casey had the same designation as garner last year and Casey made the initial 53.
                    IDK how much the current position designations on the roster matter at the moment. Garner was originally listed as TE. Graham's designation could change, too. There are players at other positions whose designation could change, too.

                    Casey was listed as TE/FB, but was released after four games IIRC, so IDK how many conclusions can be drawn from that.

                    Opurum and Janovich had some rushing attempts in college and were pretty good, especially Opurum IIRC. Garner was a pretty good receiver from the TE and WR positions. All are good ST players especially Janovich.

                    It will be interesting to follow TC developments and preseason games to see how the roster is constructed.
                    "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Hadez View Post
                      Anyone who wants a real game example of this see our last game vs Seattle in the regular season.

                      Green was going to have a major role in the offense. He was lining up at TE and FB that game. Iirc he had a rushing carry. He suffered a injury and I remember in a couple pressers talk of how it was a setback to the gameplan he got hurt.

                      Like Sam said need depth if we want to be able to count on our game plan.
                      In 2011, Denver had one FB, Spencer Larsen. IIRC, he was injured in the first playoff game. When the Broncos went to NE*, they couldn't get under Center in the I because they didn't have a FB. They were limited to the Spread Option offense.

                      Belichick lined his D up in a 50, Aggied the 0 tech to strong side 1, Eagled the weak side 5 to a 3, brought the WOLB up to a 5, put the SILB at Backer depth over the strong B Gap, had the WILB at Backer Depth over the weak side A Gap, kept the strong side 5 and boxed the SOLB. There was literally no place to run when in the Spread Gun look, and they couldn't get in the I Formation to get the Pats* out of that D because they had no depth at FB.
                      "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by samparnell View Post
                        That could be. Part of the decision will depend on how often they plan to use 21 personnel formations, and if there are any plans for 22 personnel formations.

                        There can be a certain amount of overlap between the TEs and FBs. Graham played some FB/H-back in Houston before. Garner played TE/WR and H-Back at Pitt.

                        Most of the I/offset I Formations have X (Split End), Y (Tight End), Z (Flanker), 20 (Fullback) and 30 (Tailback). If four Ys is too many, what is the correct amount of Xs and Zs? Would five WRs be enough?

                        3 QBs + 2 FBs + 3 TBs + 3 TEs + 5 WRs + 9 OL = 25 is one possibility. Or, 8 OL and 6 WR. Or, 8 OL and 4 TE. Or, 8 OL and 4 TB.
                        There is also the possibility that we risk Trevor on the PS. Dysert had that one good PS game and we kept him on the roster and then the following year moved him to the PS.

                        The WR's on the roster right now are:

                        Addison, Bralon WR
                        16 Fowler, Bennie WR
                        17 Frazier, Mose WR
                        14 Latimer, Cody WR
                        5 Neal, Durron WR
                        11 Norwood, Jordan
                        15 Posey, DeVier WR
                        19 Raymond, Kalif WR
                        10 Sanders, Emmanuel
                        87 Taylor, Jordan WR
                        88 Thomas, Demaryius


                        Right now I would argue that we have 5 WR's on the roster who are locks (Bolded). Unless Booker has PR/KR abilities that I am unaware of I see a need for us to carry 6 WR's.

                        I am thinking we look more like this:

                        2 QBs + 1 FBs + 3 TBs + 4 TEs + 6 WRs + 9 OL = 25

                        Qb: Sanchez, Lynch
                        PS Qb: Trevor
                        FB: Janovich
                        TB: Anderson, Booker, Thompson (Also FB Depth #3)
                        PS RB: Bibbs
                        TE: Jeff, Virgil, Garner (Also FB Depth), Graham
                        PS TE: Coble
                        WR: DT, Sanders, Taylor, Fowler, Latimer, one of (Bralon, Jordan or Kalif)
                        WR PS: Mose
                        OL: Ty, Michael, Donald, Russell, Connor, Max, Matt, Dillon
                        PS OL: Lars & Myers
                        Last edited by Rich_C; 05-11-2016, 06:49 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Rich_C View Post
                          There is also the possibility that we risk Trevor on the PS. Dysert had that one good PS game and we kept him on the roster and then the following year moved him to the PS.

                          The WR's on the roster right now are:

                          Addison, Bralon WR
                          16 Fowler, Bennie WR
                          17 Frazier, Mose WR
                          14 Latimer, Cody WR
                          5 Neal, Durron WR
                          11 Norwood, Jordan
                          15 Posey, DeVier WR
                          19 Raymond, Kalif WR
                          10 Sanders, Emmanuel
                          87 Taylor, Jordan WR
                          88 Thomas, Demaryius


                          Right now I would argue that we have 5 WR's on the roster who are locks (Bolded). Unless Booker has PR/KR abilities that I am unaware of I see a need for us to carry 6 WR's.

                          I am thinking we look more like this:

                          2 QBs + 1 FBs + 3 TBs + 4 TEs + 6 WRs + 9 OL = 25

                          Qb: Sanchez, Lynch
                          PS Qb: Trevor
                          FB: Janovich
                          TB: Anderson, Booker, Thompson (Also FB Depth #3)
                          PS RB: Bibbs
                          TE: Jeff, Virgil, Garner (Also FB Depth), Graham
                          PS TE: Coble
                          WR: DT, Sanders, Taylor, Fowler, Latimer, one of (Bralon, Jordan or Kalif)
                          WR PS: Mose
                          OL: Ty, Michael, Donald, Russell, Connor, Max, Matt, Dillon
                          PS OL: Lars & Myers
                          We'll see what happens. All they're doing right now is running around in shorts, jerseys and caps. When the hats and pads go on in TC and the hitting begins will be when the picture becomes more focused.
                          "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by samparnell View Post
                            We'll see what happens. All they're doing right now is running around in shorts, jerseys and caps. When the hats and pads go on in TC and the hitting begins will be when the picture becomes more focused.
                            I agree. One player aside form the FB group etc I am looking forward to seeing the TC is Nixon. I am excited to see his progress. For me at least I see Nixon as having a far larger upside for us than Doss. I am also wondering if he could take some reps as a PR/KR for us and perhaps could also be a gunner on ST.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Toben Opurum was released yesterday.
                              "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X