Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Quit all the whining

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by In-com-plete
    I've been arguing the same thing for 3 days now. And I've said who I think we should have drafted. I don't want to sound like mntnman and hammer the same thing over and over but since you asked I will.

    How many teams make it to the final four and spend next years first round draft pick on a future franchise QB when their QB has atleast 4 good years left in him. I mean Jake has improved every year while in Denver and we have a 32-11 record with him. Making the playoffs every year he's been here.

    Jake Plummer was not the weakest link last year. Jake Plummer was not the reason we lost in the AFCCG. Jake Plummer didn't allow the Steelers to convert like 8 of their first 9 third down conversions. Jake Plummer did not fail to get pressure on Roethlesburger while he converted third and long after third and long.

    Can you guess who I wanted in the first round? Can you guess what position(s) Shanahan has ignored year in and year out?

    If you said DT or DE you win. I don't think we should have taken a DE with #11, but Ngata or Bunkley was right there. Either one, preferably Ngata, would have been good. Ngata helps us win right now and that's exactly who I feel we should have drafted.

    I will say I have nothing against Cutler, it just seems every year some QB comes out of nowhere and gets drafted high. Boller, Losman, and Alex Smith come to mind. I hope Cutler isn't like those three.

    BTW, I read an article about a year ago by Len Pasquerreli. He was talking how the Pats always draft lineman high and pay them well. But he kinda bashed the Broncos/Shanahan (nothing new there) for not investing early picks in lineman. He said that's the reason we are always taking chances on guys like Gardner and Brown and Warren. I thought this was just another article where the writer wants to take his shots at us. But now I realize what he was talking about. Now I see how important the D-line is. We never invest early in the D-line and this was the time to do it.
    I wouldn't mind a DE or DT at all. I am sure Shanny wouldn't of traded up for a DT in Ngata or Bunkley. If you think about the DT position converting to NFL. How often does a team draft there "franchise DT" that earlly. The only one I remember even being drafted earlly that has a big impact is Stroud on the Jags.

    Warren was a DT picked high and we have him (re-signed and all). We also have Brown that stayed healthy last year. We have a lot of money invested in DL. I agree I was hyped up hoping we would get DE, S, TE (also walker) w/ earlly picks.

    My point is... how often do you see a more consistant team then the Broncos. What happens if Jake got injured. What if Jake goes back being Jake.

    We are going to be better in this situation for the future of the franchise. Our D-line did a great job last year for us. They helped us have a great record and will only get better working with eachother in their second year in our system. I care less what stats say anymore.

    I also believe he did address a need in pass-rushing w/ lang and elvis.

    Also if we invested top dollar amount in DT.. our money we be placed lop sided across positions. Basically we would have to release some people on our D-line which is not a problem having either Bunkley or Ngata.

    What I think I am tring to say is would you rather have a big tough DT to take up a couple people help with our blitz and being able to get to their QB alittle more

    OR

    #1 QB (depends on who you take as your #1 between the three QB's)

    AGAIN Raiders are going to regret making there move on BPA on Deffence (believe me they are all crying out here in CA not getting Cutler and mad we got him)

    Whos Aaron Brooks's back up? walter? tuisoop Poo. So they are going to have him as their franchise QB great for them.

    Also why risk sucking w/no QB then go into rebuilding. Rebuild what... We are not a rebuilding franchise.

    Cutler is a top 5 player in a draft that we got at 11. Bunkley and Ngata are not top 10 yes. So BPA is for sure Cutler.

    I know I blabbed all over the place... I to wanted a DE at 15 like lawson. I also think Elvis will be able to contribute for us... and when I look at our schedule I see us kicking all of their a55's.

    Only time can tell if it is a great decision... I can't remember any Huge deffence changing DT in before 11 though. I can w/ QB's

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by myoung
      While we don't know how the players will turn out, we certainly know the positions they play and the players we have. We came one game away from the super bowl and we lost because we don't have a pass rush without blitzing the house and we got out physicalled up front on D. So many people are concerned that we didn't at least try to address the problem. I see the point. I don't agree with it because I think the move for Cutler was good.

      But when you view what we have and what we drafted people have every right in the world to be concerned about the direction.

      If we had drafted corners with every pick of the first four rounds; wouldn't we have the right to be concerned? Of course we would. The same concept applies here. Many don't see how these players will impact the team in the near future. Based on what we already have in place.
      If you expect any rookie ever to be the answer to your problems and take you over the edge to the superbowl you are putting your hopes in a horrible place. You cannot address a problem with the draft and think it is then fixed no matter who you get. A lot of players do not do good in the pros and even more of them are worthless in their first season. If you expected us to fill in all the holes with the draft then you are not a football knowledgable fan. The draft is for the future to assure the team is good in the long run and competes for many years. It is not to fill immediate needs. Only very bad teams try to fill in needs and they usually don't even expect to win using those rookies for a few years.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by jhns
        If you expect any rookie ever to be the answer to your problems and take you over the edge to the superbowl you are putting your hopes in a horrible place. You cannot address a problem with the draft and think it is then fixed no matter who you get. A lot of players do not do good in the pros and even more of them are worthless in their first season. If you expected us to fill in all the holes with the draft then you are not a football knowledgable fan. The draft is for the future to assure the team is good in the long run and competes for many years. It is not to fill immediate needs. Only very bad teams try to fill in needs and they usually don't even expect to win using those rookies for a few years.
        well put... CP for you never mind i can't I need to spread the love around before I give on to you

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by jhns
          If you expect any rookie ever to be the answer to your problems and take you over the edge to the superbowl you are putting your hopes in a horrible place. You cannot address a problem with the draft and think it is then fixed no matter who you get. A lot of players do not do good in the pros and even more of them are worthless in their first season. If you expected us to fill in all the holes with the draft then you are not a football knowledgable fan. The draft is for the future to assure the team is good in the long run and competes for many years. It is not to fill immediate needs. Only very bad teams try to fill in needs and they usually don't even expect to win using those rookies for a few years.

          That is not correct. Look at Heath Miller last year. He was a significant factor for the Steelers last year. They drafted him because they needed a TE and he would contribute quickly. What about Big Ben the year before. Hmm and what about the Seahawks. They took their middle lb in the second round. It was a huge need for them. Don't you think he contributed to the team. How about us we drafted CBs because it was an area of need. Did we use them? Yes.... Did we depend on them? Yes.... It is definately not just the bad teams that have rookies produce. In fact the better teams usually do a better job of picking and many of the players product quicker. The rookies on top teams are usually expected to contribute and fill a hole not be the superstar that fixes the franchise. This often times helps them be productive quicker. If you need more examples to help prove the point I would be happy to provide. But just last years draft (as I have already shown you) is pretty telling.

          I do not expect the rookie to be a superstar. But you are crazy if you think that teams don't draft for needs. Most teams expect a very high pick to come in and improve that position. Now does that not work out in some cases of course. But the draft is a very big part of teams addressing offseason needs. It is the free agency period plus the draft that is used to address needs.


          The reality is that coaches and GMs in this league are on a very short leash and most of them don't have years to groom talent. They can't afford to be bad for three or four years. If they are they would be building a team for the next coach. That is not the mindset of the NFL. That is why teams that are loaded with talent and the coaches have job security (Eagles, Pats, etc...) Coaches and GMs just can't afford to draft guys and wait for years upon years to get production.

          I do agree that not all draft picks will turn out. I never expect much from a second day pick. In fact I am surprised when one of them contributes. I am happy if a 2nd and 3rd rounder starts for us at some time. But if we don't get production out of first round picks we put ourselves at a competitive disadvantage because the top teams do get production.

          You have to believe that a top DT or DE in this draft would have improved that position.... I do not expect them to be the best in the league or even be the difference by themselves. But if you think teams don't expect improvement at some positions then you are mistaken. When you draft an area of need with a first round pick you have to expect them to come in and start. You also would expect them to be an upgrade to what you had (if it was truly a position of need). The exception to this is probably QB where a first round QB normally provides a drop off the first year they play.

          Again I want to reiterate that I love the Cutler pick but your statements, while they got you a CP, are way off. Teams can't afford anymore to do what you are talking about.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by SM19
            Just how many "franchise DTs" are there in the NFL? Aside from Marcus Stroud, there's Casey Hampton, Vince Wilfork maybe? DTs with the combination of size and athleticism to make a real impact in the NFL are rare, and you have to take them where you can get them.
            Agree you prove my point

            Comment


            • #21
              I agree - John Lynch needs a replacement sooner than Jake....

              We really need a fast safety, ala Polumalo of the Steelers!
              sigpic

              #TEBOWDOMINATES...Love Orange and Blue Gators and Broncos!

              Jake Plummer will always be my #1 Quarterback!!!!!

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by myoung
                That is not correct. Look at Heath Miller last year. He was a significant factor for the Steelers last year. They drafted him because they needed a TE and he would contribute quickly. What about Big Ben the year before. Hmm and what about the Seahawks. They took their middle lb in the second round. It was a huge need for them. Don't you think he contributed to the team. How about us we drafted CBs because it was an area of need. Did we use them? Yes.... Did we depend on them? Yes.... It is definately not just the bad teams that have rookies produce. In fact the better teams usually do a better job of picking and many of the players product quicker. The rookies on top teams are usually expected to contribute and fill a hole not be the superstar that fixes the franchise. This often times helps them be productive quicker. If you need more examples to help prove the point I would be happy to provide. But just last years draft (as I have already shown you) is pretty telling.

                I do not expect the rookie to be a superstar. But you are crazy if you think that teams don't draft for needs. Most teams expect a very high pick to come in and improve that position. Now does that not work out in some cases of course. But the draft is a very big part of teams addressing offseason needs. It is the free agency period plus the draft that is used to address needs.
                Thank you. And don't forget our own Darrent Williams and Dominique Foxworth just last year. Or D.J. Williams the year before.

                You can't count on an immediate improvement of your team from a rookie. But it is surely possible. And the higher the pick, the more likely it should be.
                "You can't take the sky from me..."
                ------
                "You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding"

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by silkamilkamonic
                  The guys that are "whining" about the picks, where would they have rather gone?

                  Instead of crying about the picks, try arguing your difference on whay Denver should have gone someplace else.
                  funny thing is if you would have asked them right after Denver selected him, most of them would have told you we should have drafted WR Chad Jackson. Funny, no one on these boards mentions that now, especially since we could have damn near gotten him with our 2nd round pick. But at the time we were suppose to waste a 15th overall pick on the guy. This is why we are the fans, and the coaches get paid to do this.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by broncosfan247
                    funny thing is if you would have asked them right after Denver selected him, most of them would have told you we should have drafted WR Chad Jackson. Funny, no one on these boards mentions that now, especially since we could have damn near gotten him with our 2nd round pick. But at the time we were suppose to waste a 15th overall pick on the guy. This is why we are the fans, and the coaches get paid to do this.
                    I wanted whitner or jason allen or move back and get lawson

                    But happier w/ Cutler (also mentioned how WR's were going to fall and didn't deserve a 1st rd grade)

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      ok, some people are actually whining about the pick, but most of the people i see are just mad at the pick....Actually not reallly mad at the pick but mad at the trading up part to get Cutler.

                      Cutler really hasnt proven a whole lot on the college lvl but he played for a bad team. If Cutler fell to 15 i think there would be alot less complainers than there is right now.

                      I personaally see it this way, Cutler might be good but i dont think he will be any better than Plummer, it was a BAD pick to trade up for, Bunkley could have been draafted at the 15 spot and you could have kept your otherr pick. Many other D-linmen were also available by the 15th pick, so i didnt see the logic of trading up, especially when you see talen like Croyle and that qB from Oregon going in the third round at QB.
                      Club Leader: Robert Griffin III > Andrew Luck

                      ^^^Get used to it.^^^

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by GridironChamp
                        ok, some people are actually whining about the pick, but most of the people i see are just mad at the pick....Actually not reallly mad at the pick but mad at the trading up part to get Cutler.

                        Cutler really hasnt proven a whole lot on the college lvl but he played for a bad team. If Cutler fell to 15 i think there would be alot less complainers than there is right now.

                        I personaally see it this way, Cutler might be good but i dont think he will be any better than Plummer, it was a BAD pick to trade up for, Bunkley could have been draafted at the 15 spot and you could have kept your otherr pick. Many other D-linmen were also available by the 15th pick, so i didnt see the logic of trading up, especially when you see talen like Croyle and that qB from Oregon going in the third round at QB.
                        Well Croyle and Clemmons have nothing on Cutler. Also Bunkley and Ngata are off the board by 15. Jets really liked Cutler at 4. The logic for trading up is got a top 5 disputably the best QB in the draft and we might never have an oppurtunity to do that again.

                        It is easier to get a DT or DE in free agency then gambling in the draft for some one that won't be considered a franchise player. Cutler was gone at that pick if it was us or some one else.

                        Cutler has proven a lot on the college level... that means you havn't seen him on the college level.

                        We have couple of the highest DT and DE on our team already in Warren and Brown...

                        the best comparison is within a 5 pick period in earlly 1st round is

                        2003- carson palmer or Dewayne Robertson DT / Johnathan Sullivan DT

                        2004 - Ben rothesburger or tommie harris DT / Will Smith DE

                        OR

                        2006 - Cutler or Ngata DT / Bunkley DT

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          When you're on the board you have two options. Draft for need or draft the best available player. ****ty teams who need multiple players should draft the best available player. Teams that feel they are close to where they need to be should draft for need.

                          IMO, reaching the AFCCG should automatically put us in the draft for need catagory. And we didn't do that. We leaned toward the best available player, and I don't even know if we took that.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by broncofan27
                            It's getting old hearing some of you state over and over again about how you are upset about Cutler. I am sorry you just don't pass up that kind of talent. When will Denver be back there ever again to get a guy like that for the future. Get over it. Jay is a bronco and will be for years to come. I know all of you people that are upset will forget all the negativity you spit out when we have a great 2006 season and are excellent for years to come because we will have a solid leader behind center. So quit the whining nothing can be done about it and you know you will be praising it later.
                            Well said. I agree. Denver will not be in the position to draft that high again. The only reason that they were this year was because of strategic trading over the past couple of years and especially this offseason. Our team is too good to draft in the first half of the round. With that kind of talent, pull the trigger. It is a great situation for this kid to develop, our team to continue to succeed with our existing quarterback, and for us to make our game more well-rounded. CP to that point.
                            Go Broncos, make me keep believing this year

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by In-com-plete

                              Can you guess who I wanted in the first round? Can you guess what position(s) Shanahan has ignored year in and year out?

                              If you said DT or DE you win. I don't think we should have taken a DE with #11, but Ngata or Bunkley was right there. Either one, preferably Ngata, would have been good. Ngata helps us win right now and that's exactly who I feel we should have drafted.

                              I will say I have nothing against Cutler, it just seems every year some QB comes out of nowhere and gets drafted high. Boller, Losman, and Alex Smith come to mind. I hope Cutler isn't like those three.

                              I wanted a defensive linemen too, but when you think about Denver picking at #15, there was a lot better talent that was availble then the Dline.

                              I don't think Ngata will do much in the NFL unless he drastically changes his work ethic. He dominated college because of his size, but he has a very poor work ethic and even admittingly says he needs to play harder in games on a more consistent level.

                              First round Qb's in the last 10 years, some have panned out to be franchise QB's, some are still trying to find their way, and some have flat out busted. Out of the 3 QB's in this years draft, you can almost bet that 1 will pan out, 1 won't, and one will take a while longer, on an average.

                              That same trend in QB's can be said about Dline also. Dline is another inconsistent position to pick in the first round also.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by silkamilkamonic
                                I wanted a defensive linemen too, but when you think about Denver picking at #15, there was a lot better talent that was availble then the Dline.

                                I don't think Ngata will do much in the NFL unless he drastically changes his work ethic. He dominated college because of his size, but he has a very poor work ethic and even admittingly says he needs to play harder in games on a more consistent level.

                                First round Qb's in the last 10 years, some have panned out to be franchise QB's, some are still trying to find their way, and some have flat out busted. Out of the 3 QB's in this years draft, you can almost bet that 1 will pan out, 1 won't, and one will take a while longer, on an average.

                                That same trend in QB's can be said about Dline also. Dline is another inconsistent position to pick in the first round also.
                                But D-line is a position that we need and have ignored for years. How much did we need a future franchise QB? Like I said earlier, we should have drafted for need.

                                Mel Kiper on Ngata:
                                Perfect body for a nose tackle and has the athleticism to play either tackle in the 4-3. Needs better technique but is a rare talent. Surprisingly active in pursuit. Never gives up on plays. Impressive agility and athleticism.

                                Sporting News:
                                Terrific upside. Brute strength and can overpower at times. When fresh, dominates the point of attack. Technique needs work and tires easily.

                                In all the other things I've read about him not once did I hear anything about a poor work ethic. I may be wrong, but I thought I read the opposite.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X