Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 69
  1. #46
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    32,448
    "Realistic" is a hard route to go, especially when you are judging with some emotion. On the one hand "homers" have tons of details, maybe even inside information, which should help provide more "realistic" predictions. On the other hand, I think most of us are believers, and once we do an assessment, we tend to lean to the positive. It's natural.

    It will be fun to hear where the "experts" place us. I have a hunch it will be a tad lower than the records in this thread and in the poll I posted earlier yesterday. Hope I'm wrong.

    In the end, if we take out the "injury" factor (especially to key players), which no one can predict, and you were putting a $1,000 bucks on the line, would you adjust your forecast???

    Have fun!

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    6,559
    Quote Originally Posted by christian rocka View Post
    In the time that ive spent here amongst you fellow bronco fans I have realized something.

    A revelation if you will.


    Bronco fans annoy me. Ya'll are negative and always expect the worst out of the team. Not to mention there are some with the most obvious case of tunnel vision ive ever seen.

    Who says this team cant do well? Who says we cant go 12-4 or 13-3 next year? For all we know we could draft someone that has a breakout year or one of our current guys could have breakout year (or all of them God-forbid) and we could win the AFC West and the Super Bowl. Its not even draft day yet and people are predicting 5-11's or sub .500 years again. Like someone before said its way too early to tell. We have no idea what the players could do come game time. So why even think that we are going to do bad?

    If the draft goes well then I think we could pull off a 12-4 year (one of those wins being over the patsies. ). I will never ever predict Denver to go under 9 wins in a season. Never. Im just that kind of a fan. Call me a homer or stupid or whatever. But I have faith that my team can pull it out each and every year. We arent scouts. We arent GM's. Were fans. And we should act like fans and support Denver no matter what. We can disagree with what they do (and the Good Lord knows I have) but in the end we have to back em. Not say that they are going to go 5-11. Come on now people. Is this not Bronco Country?

    +1 On this son!

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Granada Nicaragua
    Posts
    9,168
    My $1000 (I like the way you put that, it puts it into perspective), and hopefully I'd get 1 game leeway either way, would be 10-6. I don't think a 3 game improvement is out of the question.

    There were some close games we got last year (Buffalo, Oakland), but there were also close games we let slip (Chicago, Green Bay). So, even with all the turmoil last year, the Broncos were not far from 9-7. You are what your record says you are - they WERE a 7-9 team in 2007. But, even with all the turmoil, injuries, etc, they were not far from a winning record. That's why I don't see a 3 game improvement as being a stretch at all.

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Now live in South Jersey.
    Posts
    2,748
    Here is the biggest misconception..... Being NEGATIVE means you are "realistic."

    RAVAGE

    Aint that the truth.
    I have been trying to explain this too people on this board for the longest.
    Being a pessimist or optimist doesn't make you a realist.
    Being realistic means you can be both. you can see both the good and the bad.
    You can honestly say what is good and bad about your team.

    We don't have to be a blind homer to be a true fan and you don't have to rip the team to shreds to be realistic.
    there is a middle ground that most people don't wanna go or don't know how to go.
    Last edited by bklynbronco; 03-20-2008 at 01:40 PM.
    Bronco fan 33 years and counting, GO BRONCOS!

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Now live in South Jersey.
    Posts
    2,748
    Quote Originally Posted by christian rocka View Post
    In the time that ive spent here amongst you fellow bronco fans I have realized something.

    A revelation if you will.


    Bronco fans annoy me. Ya'll are negative and always expect the worst out of the team. Not to mention there are some with the most obvious case of tunnel vision ive ever seen.

    Who says this team cant do well? Who says we cant go 12-4 or 13-3 next year? For all we know we could draft someone that has a breakout year or one of our current guys could have breakout year (or all of them God-forbid) and we could win the AFC West and the Super Bowl. Its not even draft day yet and people are predicting 5-11's or sub .500 years again. Like someone before said its way too early to tell. We have no idea what the players could do come game time. So why even think that we are going to do bad?

    If the draft goes well then I think we could pull off a 12-4 year (one of those wins being over the patsies. ). I will never ever predict Denver to go under 9 wins in a season. Never. Im just that kind of a fan. Call me a homer or stupid or whatever. But I have faith that my team can pull it out each and every year. We arent scouts. We arent GM's. Were fans. And we should act like fans and support Denver no matter what. We can disagree with what they do (and the Good Lord knows I have) but in the end we have to back em. Not say that they are going to go 5-11. Come on now people. Is this not Bronco Country?

    In a utopian bronco world we all would predict the broncos are going to be 16-0.
    Of course we can say that can be 12-4 but after last year failing season of 7-9 and the limited moves in FA though they might pan out that's not enough for some of us to brag about this team.
    Some of us are waiting untill the draft to make a better evaluation about this team, that's what being realistic is all about.
    Making rational judgements based on facts and not hopes and dreams but at the same time not making negative judgements based on our personal experiences.
    We all not totally pessimstic but some of us a little to optimistic so we need to bring it to the middle.

    Some people are normal pessimist with everything in life not just sports. some are overly optimistic in life not just sports so those characters will reflect in how they see thier teams.

    Some people can bridge those two and make an honest assessment of anything including the upcoming bronco season.
    Bronco fan 33 years and counting, GO BRONCOS!

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    32,448
    Quote Originally Posted by PowderAddict View Post
    My $1000 (I like the way you put that, it puts it into perspective), and hopefully I'd get 1 game leeway either way, would be 10-6. I don't think a 3 game improvement is out of the question.

    There were some close games we got last year (Buffalo, Oakland), but there were also close games we let slip (Chicago, Green Bay). So, even with all the turmoil last year, the Broncos were not far from 9-7. You are what your record says you are - they WERE a 7-9 team in 2007. But, even with all the turmoil, injuries, etc, they were not far from a winning record. That's why I don't see a 3 game improvement as being a stretch at all.
    Hey Powder - I am very much aligned with you at this point, give or take a game. I have it at 9 and 7 right now, but need another month or two to conclude on that assessment. I'll try to be brief..... Overall we should be a better team, but at this point I can not make a strong argument for a significant improvement. D is definitely better. But how much? I like McCree and Boss. But it comes down to dline, and I am just not sure how much we can expect from last year's "kids". I believe they will mature to some degree. I am a bit stubborn, but I really wanted that "experienced" DT thru FA /Trade, to provide more stability and dynamics, all to be expected when you have so much youth in one area. And coaching changes may be a factor.

    On O I am just not convinced that we have improved that much...yet. I believe Cutler will continue to grow, and if his growth "accelerates", look out!! (thinking Eli impact). The question again remains, do we have a better oline? If Nalen and Hamilton stay strong, and we get some growth (once again) from the younger folks, it will definitely be better in 08. But I am not excited about the WR situation at present. We are weaker right now than when we started in 07, when Walker was a threat. We are blessed with Marshall...he is "all pro" material. But he needs support. And I am not enamoured with the RB situation. It's kind of a neutral feeling. I am one of the folks wanting an upgrade here.

    And like it or not, the kicking game is a total "?". I'd classify the special teams that way as well, although there seems to have been an upgrade.

    We can't count on the draft players to make an immediate impact. Especially at certain positions. So if we go linemen, unless they are the cream of the crop (Longs, Ellis, Dorsey) it's not wise to expect signifcant impact in year one. Lets be honest. Conversely, there are immediate impact players out there at certain positions that we can get. But it's all a balance....are we patient or not?

    I'll get back on this, maybe by the end of April.

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Fort William, Bloody Highlands
    Posts
    817
    I'll check back after the first three preseason games with my prediciton. If, like last year, the O is playing well but the D is struggling hard, another losing season (and I predicted sub-500 last year). however, if the O is struggling some and D is playing well ahead of them, then methinks a winning season might be in order, maybe 10-6 or better. This seems to be the trend.

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Where AMERICANS are Born!
    Posts
    329
    Quote Originally Posted by JayCutler4MVP!!! View Post
    I agree. And I'm being honest. Its not a homer pick. I wonder if Pats fans who said thier team would go 16-0 last year was considered a "homer" pick.

    I turned out they were being honest anyways.

    But I guess I'll stop being a homer and look into reality that We might only go 15-1 or 14-2.
    Amen brother! 16-0 is all you're gonna get from me, because to say they will probably go 9-7 or 8-8 is just wrong. I don't go into each week saying, "Well they'll probably lose this week so I better not get my hopes up"

    It's easy to say they will go 8-8, because when they go 12-4 you can say "Hey! they did better than I expected"! what a great season! But if you say I believe they can win it all and they don't, you might be disappointed. I'll take the risk of disappointment rather than playing it safe every time.

    There have been a lot of teams expected to have a losing season that went on to have an outstanding one instead.

    But I'll take 15-1, because you need to lose at least one game right before the playoffs, so you don't get that overconfidence thing going on.

    Anyway, at the end of the day at least we are not San Diego fans.
    Last edited by GeneralSterlingPrice; 03-20-2008 at 09:58 AM.
    Jo Bob is here to remind us that the biggest and the baddest get to make all the rules.

    Bleeding Orange and Blue (Literally)

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Granada Nicaragua
    Posts
    9,168
    Quote Originally Posted by CanDB View Post
    Hey Powder - I am very much aligned with you at this point, give or take a game. I have it at 9 and 7 right now, but need another month or two to conclude on that assessment. I'll try to be brief..... Overall we should be a better team, but at this point I can not make a strong argument for a significant improvement. D is definitely better. But how much? I like McCree and Boss. But it comes down to dline, and I am just not sure how much we can expect from last year's "kids". I believe they will mature to some degree. I am a bit stubborn, but I really wanted that "experienced" DT thru FA /Trade, to provide more stability and dynamics, all to be expected when you have so much youth in one area. And coaching changes may be a factor.

    On O I am just not convinced that we have improved that much...yet. I believe Cutler will continue to grow, and if his growth "accelerates", look out!! (thinking Eli impact). The question again remains, do we have a better oline? If Nalen and Hamilton stay strong, and we get some growth (once again) from the younger folks, it will definitely be better in 08. But I am not excited about the WR situation at present. We are weaker right now than when we started in 07, when Walker was a threat. We are blessed with Marshall...he is "all pro" material. But he needs support. And I am not enamoured with the RB situation. It's kind of a neutral feeling. I am one of the folks wanting an upgrade here.

    And like it or not, the kicking game is a total "?". I'd classify the special teams that way as well, although there seems to have been an upgrade.

    We can't count on the draft players to make an immediate impact. Especially at certain positions. So if we go linemen, unless they are the cream of the crop (Longs, Ellis, Dorsey) it's not wise to expect signifcant impact in year one. Lets be honest. Conversely, there are immediate impact players out there at certain positions that we can get. But it's all a balance....are we patient or not?

    I'll get back on this, maybe by the end of April.
    I'm really not expecting alot from any rookies, and basing my thoughts on the current team.

    Walker/Marshall is a better duo than Marshall/Colbert, but Marshall was not full speed almost all year, and the Broncos still won 7 games. I'm just hoping that the young players, returned from injury starters, etc, equal 3 more wins than last year. I will make a confession - as much as I try, I can't get out from behind my orange-colored glasses

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    32,448
    Quote Originally Posted by PowderAddict View Post
    I'm really not expecting alot from any rookies, and basing my thoughts on the current team.

    Walker/Marshall is a better duo than Marshall/Colbert, but Marshall was not full speed almost all year, and the Broncos still won 7 games. I'm just hoping that the young players, returned from injury starters, etc, equal 3 more wins than last year. I will make a confession - as much as I try, I can't get out from behind my orange-colored glasses
    I'm 9 and 7 without the draft. I was 10 and 6 when I made my first thread a month or so ago, and it really came down to what you have said. You're doing the more basic math here, and who's to say those aren't the essential factors in the equation. I do think "returnees" and "maturing" may be worth 2 or 3 games. And when you really analyze it, many games are won and lost by few points. So we may even be in for more of surprise, as long as we have the guys with the right stuff, who find ways to win.

    We haven't really lost too much in the offseason relative to how we finished the year (as long as Walker doesn't get back to his glory days...he may have a surge but probably no long term steady productivity). And we've gained some with our acquisitions, though on the conservative side. But yes, these all contribute to incremental gains. Maybe I am a little tougher since my first thread, because of some management confusion, shall we say, with potentially real impacts in terms of coaching and even consistent strategizing, etc. And at that time, I thought we would have filled some of the gaps better.....the hype got to me (guilty as charged)!

    But ya, I want to see how the draft, etc. transpire, and maybe (and I want to believe it) I'll get those wins up a notch or two. Not because of the type of glasses I wear, but for legitimate reasons that we can all feel strong about.


  11. #56
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    10,570
    I don't see how - with one of the major excuses last year was that we had new coaches and it take time to gel and learn the various systems - that anyone would think we'll be that dramatically improved (record-wise) with new assistant coaches and the firing of our General Manager going into '08.

    I just don't see anything being dramatically different next season. San Diego is still the power-house of the division, and this team is yet again lacking continuity. I support the moves Shanahan has made thus far this offseason, but we're not going to be that much more cohesive (especially on defense) in 2008 than we were in 2007, IMO. The offensive line is still a major question mark. We don't have any clue if the defensive line will become dominant, impact players. John Lynch is another year older and another step slower. DJ Williams is likely getting moved around again. We have no legitimate #2 receiver to compliment Marshall yet.

    The only real thing I'm sure of going into 2008 is that Cutler, Marshall, and Scheffler will be better. But it won't make a lick of difference if the defense still can't pressure the quarterback or stop offenses from crossing mid-field on every series.

    So honestly and truthfully, I'll say 8-8. I think this is a long rebuilding project, and it's going to take a couple of more drafts before we're reaching for Super Bowl aspirations again.

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    18,970
    I th ink the defense gets better with the subtraction of Bates. I base this not only by the way we played last year, but by the comments I heard Lynch make in an interview on ESPN radio. He didn't lay 'blame' on Bates, but he was pretty clear that he was not impressed with the system and how that coaching 'trial' went.

    The addition of our starting center and guard is a huge addition as well.

    I know one thing. I know the LOSS of Suquist will not have a SINGLE thing to do with our season.. good or bad. How many practices do we think Sunquist helped with the team? No. The loss of sunquist won't make a damn bit of difference to the team and how they play.

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    10,570
    Quote Originally Posted by Ravage!!! View Post
    I th ink the defense gets better with the subtraction of Bates. I base this not only by the way we played last year, but by the comments I heard Lynch make in an interview on ESPN radio. He didn't lay 'blame' on Bates, but he was pretty clear that he was not impressed with the system and how that coaching 'trial' went.

    The addition of our starting center and guard is a huge addition as well.

    I know one thing. I know the LOSS of Suquist will not have a SINGLE thing to do with our season.. good or bad. How many practices do we think Sunquist helped with the team? No. The loss of sunquist won't make a damn bit of difference to the team and how they play.
    Well, it depends.

    If Sundquist had one philosophy and brought in X-amount of players based on that philosophy, while Shanahan has another philosophy and brought in X-amount of players based on that philosophy, then we could see a mixed product going into next season. And Shanahan trying to 'weed out' Sundquist's philosophy (and essentially players) could have a tremendous impact going into next year.

    We also don't know if there were players or coaches who favored Sundquist or are upset about his termination. That could have an impact, as well.

    However, without knowing the extent of Sundquist's role at Dove Valley, it is conjecture and opinion to assume that his departure will have an impact. However, I don't believe his termination makes this team more cohesive and gives them more of a sense of continuity going into '08. Long term? Perhaps. But I think that right now, there's still a lot of turmoil resulting from last season's performance, and I think it's naive to believe that it won't carry over whatsoever in '08, with many more new faces both on and off the field.

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    32,448
    Quote Originally Posted by mojo0730 View Post
    Well, it depends.

    If Sundquist had one philosophy and brought in X-amount of players based on that philosophy, while Shanahan has another philosophy and brought in X-amount of players based on that philosophy, then we could see a mixed product going into next season. And Shanahan trying to 'weed out' Sundquist's philosophy (and essentially players) could have a tremendous impact going into next year.

    We also don't know if there were players or coaches who favored Sundquist or are upset about his termination. That could have an impact, as well.

    However, without knowing the extent of Sundquist's role at Dove Valley, it is conjecture and opinion to assume that his departure will have an impact. However, I don't believe his termination makes this team more cohesive and gives them more of a sense of continuity going into '08. Long term? Perhaps. But I think that right now, there's still a lot of turmoil resulting from last season's performance, and I think it's naive to believe that it won't carry over whatsoever in '08, with many more new faces both on and off the field.
    I agree with you Mojo.

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    18,970
    Quote Originally Posted by mojo0730 View Post
    Well, it depends.

    If Sundquist had one philosophy and brought in X-amount of players based on that philosophy, while Shanahan has another philosophy and brought in X-amount of players based on that philosophy, then we could see a mixed product going into next season. And Shanahan trying to 'weed out' Sundquist's philosophy (and essentially players) could have a tremendous impact going into next year.

    We also don't know if there were players or coaches who favored Sundquist or are upset about his termination. That could have an impact, as well.

    However, without knowing the extent of Sundquist's role at Dove Valley, it is conjecture and opinion to assume that his departure will have an impact. However, I don't believe his termination makes this team more cohesive and gives them more of a sense of continuity going into '08. Long term? Perhaps. But I think that right now, there's still a lot of turmoil resulting from last season's performance, and I think it's naive to believe that it won't carry over whatsoever in '08, with many more new faces both on and off the field.
    As you said.. this is all COMPLETE conjecture. Everyone acknowledges that Shanahan is in charge of player personnel... so how is Sunquist all of a sudden bringing in guys that SHanahan didn't????

    Plus.. how much time do you think Sunquist spends with the players? Seriously? Do you think he hangs out in the locker room? Down n the field? You think he spends time during film days? During two-a-days?

    Sunquist was a paper pusher.

    Oh well. I know you like your lil scenarios in your head. I know you enjoy thinking of shanahan weilding his axe around the hallways, wearing his crown, and talking down to everyone.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •