Page 12 of 13 FirstFirst ... 2 10 11 12 13 LastLast
Results 166 to 180 of 186
  1. #166
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    33,341
    If you have a salary cap (in a sport), which is a good thing, it can be a double-edged sword. You want great players, you have to pay them great.....leaving less for the rest. You don't have great players, you can get more quality overall.

    That's why you pay someone good money to manage your salary cap, and there is so much strategy involved in putting together a roster, for the short and long term.

    Green Bay is basically stating, "we got two of the best players in all of football, anchoring our O and D, so lets make sure we make them happy." And that makes sense to me. For example, when teams make trades, the smart guys almost always say that you go for the best player in the deal, even if that means you give up more players to get them. They make an impact. They lead he team performance-wise. They make a difference. They make an impact.

    So......Green Bay's strategy works for them, and as long as you have a decent strategy, the best thing to do is follow it. Plus Rodgers and Matthews are amazing football players!

  2. #167
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    20,151
    not only von getting big money but isn't DT Walton beadles aren't they all up in the same year 2014...plus next year decker woody n clady we can still franchise clady but long term deal would be better not only to keep him 5-6 yrs but for cap relief...

    so in next 1-3 yrs lots of money going to be dished out n a lot tough choices on who we keep...guess that the FO gets paid a lot to...

  3. #168
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,941
    A lot of key players are up for new contracts soon. Have to remember though that Doom and his large contract are already gone, Mays and Kuper probably will be soon, and unfortunately Peyton and Champ will be within the next few years.

    We will keep the players that we view as the nucleus of the team. Von is definitely a part of that nucleus. I would have to think Clady and Thomas are also a part of it. When you get to players like Decker, Woodyard, Harris, and Beadles, things get a bit more interesting. We will most likely see the players deemed most expendable leave for more money elsewhere.
    Go Broncos!!!

  4. #169
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    11,079
    Quote Originally Posted by Iron Clady View Post
    A lot of key players are up for new contracts soon. Have to remember though that Doom and his large contract are already gone, Mays and Kuper probably will be soon, and unfortunately Peyton and Champ will be within the next few years.

    We will keep the players that we view as the nucleus of the team. Von is definitely a part of that nucleus. I would have to think Clady and Thomas are also a part of it. When you get to players like Decker, Woodyard, Harris, and Beadles, things get a bit more interesting. We will most likely see the players deemed most expendable leave for more money elsewhere.
    Many are already calling Harris the best nickel back in the game, I doubt we fully want to part with him, but its going to come down to the cost of keeping him. Decker probably wont command much on the open market as a RFA so chances are we probably will keep him. Beadles has been turning some heads especially when he wasnt forced to bail out Walton so often, but this year could easily change that. Woodyard is an odd duck because he has to prove last year wasnt a fluke.

  5. #170
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    190
    Damn my parents for giving me the genes that make me 5'9 and 185 pounds with no fast twitch muscle fibers. That blew my chance at being the highest paid linebacker in the NFL.

  6. #171
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,721
    Quote Originally Posted by Mile_High_Kiwi View Post
    Damn my parents for giving me the genes that make me 5'9 and 185 pounds with no fast twitch muscle fibers. That blew my chance at being the highest paid linebacker in the NFL.
    Just look around for some meteor showers and see what happens when you touch one of them. If it is anything good, let us know. If not, I am sure we won't hear from you . (j/k)

    That might be your answer to your gene pool limitations .

  7. #172
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    3,156

    The Case for Drafting a QB in an early round

    Personally, I'm not a draft evaluator or anything like that. I do put some stock in the Lewin Forecast put out by Football Outsiders.

    Of course, it shouldn't replace professional scouting or anything like that, but we've all seen scouts overrate certain qualities in prospects (Often things like arm strength or winning) and underrate other qualities (Accuracy and games started along with things like ability to rush or avoid sacks which suggests quick release).

    Last year, Lewin Forecast predicted a VERY good QB draft with RGIII and Luck being projected higher than most QB's of any recent draft, but it also predicted Russell Wilson even higher.

    http://www.footballoutsiders.com/nfl...-forecast-2012

    From year to year, the system has had some major correct predictions, but, of course, has some misses.

    But it works fairly well because it has found some patterns in the prospects that scouts have loved, but who have failed or succeeded.

    Anyhow, what's interesting about this year's forecast is that the projection system likes this year's draft class quite a bit. Oh, and a note, it loved last year's draft, but it wasn't as high on Osweiler which of course isn't quite as important as it would be had he landed with another team in another situation.

    http://www.footballoutsiders.com/sta...-forecast-2013

    Nonetheless, I'd personally be quite happy if the Broncos had somebody who the system and scouts rates well in the first three rounds and we pounced on him. We all know that QB is the most important position on the field, but even with this knowledge, I think that we underrate the position. We'd be lucky if we could have a Montana to Young or Favre to Rodgers type of story, but we'd even be lucky if we got a Cutler, Romo or Rivers as QB's like this don't fall into your lap all of the time either.

    So, I think it makes sense to draft a QB early and even in a weak class, we may get a better chance at a good prospect if the class is generally undervalued.
    My adopted fan is dogfish

    . . . . . . . . . . .
    . Post Your Artwork .
    . . . . . . . . . . .


  8. #173
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pocatello, Idaho
    Posts
    10,972
    We already drafted a QB and last year we never carried more than two into a game. I doubt we touch one until late late if at all. Personally, I know I will get flamed for this but I wouldn't mind bringing in Jamarcus Russell on a vet minimum contract to see if this comeback is series. His physical talent can't be questioned with maybe the strongest arm ever in the NFL but his work ethic was horrible. If he has turned a corner he could be a low risk high reward player

  9. #174
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Madison, SD
    Posts
    1,166
    In some ways, I agree with what both of you have said.

    I am for us drafting a QB every year, but it all depends on the value of where they get drafted.

    Unless a top notch guy like Wilson, Barkley or Nassib fall to us in the 3rd-4th round, I think it's pretty unlikely we go for a QB until later on in the draft, if at all.

    As for the JaMarcus Russell theory, I wouldn't be opposed to it. If he gets back in playing shape and has "turned things around", as he claims, he may be worth taking a flier on. Worst case scenario, he doesn't pan out and we move on. The most we lose out on is the vet minimum contract we'd sign him to. Hanie did nothing for us last year and costed us well over a million for his salary.

    Back to the draft. It's been reported that we're bringing in Arizona QB Matt Scott for a visit and private workout. He's projected to be a 5th round guy that could maybe rise all the way up to the end of the 3rd, depending on how much a team likes him. He could certainly be a possibility, if he falls to our pick in the 5th.


    Regardless of what happens regarding this situation, they WILL bring in atleast one more QB if for nothing else than to just have more "arms" for camp. I don't remember us ever taking just two QB's into camp and that likely won't start this year. Whether it's trough draft pick/trade/UDFA or street free agent, atleast one more QB will be brought in.

    Who that will be and in what capacity is the fascinating thing.
    RESTORE THE [B][COLOR="DarkOrange"]ORANGE CRUSH!!!![/COLOR][/B]
    :smash

    LONG LIVE THE ORANGE AND BLUE!!!

  10. #175
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    3,156
    I love the general idea of bringing in low risk high reward players and would love to do so. Not so big on low risk, no reward players like Jamarcus Russell is. I'd rather take on Vince Young or well, virtually anyone else, if we're going to go that route. JR is more like a low risk, low reward player.

    If the team didn't draft a QB, that wouldn't surprise me as teams don't often try the strategy of drafting a couple in multiple years for a couple of years down the road. I'm hoping that Elway is serious about BPA and would consider it and I think that it would seriously be a good tactic based also off of the reality of how hard it is to draft a QB and how important it is.

    Of course, the Broncos have more information on Osweiler than we do, so their assessment of him may warrant them passing on a QB if they think him to be for real, but playing the odds would be a smart move, in my opinion. And using a roster spot on such a QB would be well worth the risk.

    EDIT: It would be pretty awesome if JR joined our team and suddenly became a terrific QB for us and the Raiders fans cried themselves to sleep even more than usual, but I doubt this would happen.
    Last edited by Archimedes Owl; 04-06-2013 at 09:57 AM.
    My adopted fan is dogfish

    . . . . . . . . . . .
    . Post Your Artwork .
    . . . . . . . . . . .


  11. #176
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Santa Fe, New Mexico, United States
    Posts
    4,230
    I feel pretty confident with Osweiler. He's in a great spot to mature.

  12. #177
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    3,156
    One other thing that I'd like to mention is that drafting promising QB's can work out well as far as they can also become future trade fodder. Guys like Flynn or Schaub or Cassell attest to how backup QB's who play decently in limited time can become trade fodder, so it alleviates the risk a bit if the QB works out, teams sometimes still end up getting nice picks for the QB that they drafted that didn't start.

    In my mind, it's similar to the general idea of always trading into future drafts to increase your longterm pick value as a longterm strategy that gives a team more picks of more value.
    My adopted fan is dogfish

    . . . . . . . . . . .
    . Post Your Artwork .
    . . . . . . . . . . .


  13. #178
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Santa Fe, New Mexico, United States
    Posts
    4,230
    If a guy is there that you absolutely cannot pass up then I can see a scenario where we take a QB to groom/compete/trade. But it just has to be the right situation.

  14. #179
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    5,525
    Posts
    8,801
    Quote Originally Posted by crash123go View Post
    We already drafted a QB and last year we never carried more than two into a game. I doubt we touch one until late late if at all. Personally, I know I will get flamed for this but I wouldn't mind bringing in Jamarcus Russell on a vet minimum contract to see if this comeback is series. His physical talent can't be questioned with maybe the strongest arm ever in the NFL but his work ethic was horrible. If he has turned a corner he could be a low risk high reward player
    Well to be fair... Jamarcus Russell is undefeated at mile high...
    *** God Bless Our Military Men And Women***

    Adopted Bronco 2015 CJ Anderson

  15. #180
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pocatello, Idaho
    Posts
    10,972
    Quote Originally Posted by Archimedes Owl View Post
    I love the general idea of bringing in low risk high reward players and would love to do so. Not so big on low risk, no reward players like Jamarcus Russell is. I'd rather take on Vince Young or well, virtually anyone else, if we're going to go that route. JR is more like a low risk, low reward player.

    If the team didn't draft a QB, that wouldn't surprise me as teams don't often try the strategy of drafting a couple in multiple years for a couple of years down the road. I'm hoping that Elway is serious about BPA and would consider it and I think that it would seriously be a good tactic based also off of the reality of how hard it is to draft a QB and how important it is.

    Of course, the Broncos have more information on Osweiler than we do, so their assessment of him may warrant them passing on a QB if they think him to be for real, but playing the odds would be a smart move, in my opinion. And using a roster spot on such a QB would be well worth the risk.

    EDIT: It would be pretty awesome if JR joined our team and suddenly became a terrific QB for us and the Raiders fans cried themselves to sleep even more than usual, but I doubt this would happen.
    Russell has the talent and he has had games where he showed it which a couple happened against us. The only way I bring him in is on a vet minimum and if his attitude has turned around like he says

Posting Permissions

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