Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 61
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pocatello, Idaho
    Posts
    10,972
    Quote Originally Posted by Thrasher View Post
    So what!?
    It seems to me like the Broncos REALLY want to keep him on the PS. If I were King, there's no way that I'd stay now.
    Really? You wouldn't stay to learn from a strong coaching staff, Wes welker, DT and a HOF QB in Peyton manning? I think his best interest to be a pro is to stay and learn in one of the greatest offenses in NFL history

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    5,182
    im guessing they activated King in the 53, then waited for packers to make their move to sign another player, then now hope he passes through waivers into the PS

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    829
    The typical salary difference for a member of the 53 is roughly 4 times what the typical practice squad player makes. So money can be a deciding factor, and even more so on that at the end of the NFL food chain.

    Minimum 6k a week practice squad.
    Minimum 405k/17 $23,823.53

    So his one week payday for active roster is nearly 4 times what he would have likely made on the PS. PS players can be signed at a higher rate, but that is kinda rare.

    If someone claims him on waivers, he might end up on their practice squad, or might end up back on Denver's if he isn't claimed. I think they simply didn't want to lose him.(they still might).

    If he would have known it was a minimum of 1 week here, vs. 3 weeks in GB, he might would have preferred to go to GB. Again money is harder to come by of guys on that end of the roster.

    To me they are simply massaging the roster by using the instruments available to them. I
    Last edited by allthings18; 10-20-2013 at 11:23 AM.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Buckeye Nation
    Posts
    8,993
    I'm guessing he won't clear waivers. I guess in the end the front office feels like were to deep at that position.
    Dread it.Run from it.
    Destiny arrives all the same.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Muscatine, Iowa
    Posts
    15,051
    Hopefully he clears waivers but I won't be shocked if he doesn't

    2013,2014, and 2015 Adopt a Bronco: Champ Bailey, Marvin Austin and Matt Paradis

  6. #21
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Muscatine, Iowa
    Posts
    15,051
    Don't teams have 24 hours to claim a player? If thats true then waiving him today gives us the best shot at keeping him because teams will be focused on tomorrow's games

    2013,2014, and 2015 Adopt a Bronco: Champ Bailey, Marvin Austin and Matt Paradis

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Buckeye Nation
    Posts
    8,993
    Do any of you think New England might sign him? I know Atlanta & Green Bay are the obvious choices but New England is sneaky like that.
    Dread it.Run from it.
    Destiny arrives all the same.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    5,091
    All those teams already had a chance to sign him. Also, everyone said he would be grabbed last time he was cut.

  9. #24
    theMileHighGuy is offline
    ಠ◡ಠ ⊙▃⊙ ಠ_ಠ ಠ~ಠ ಥ_ಥ
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    away from home
    Posts
    11,122
    Dang. I wish I could make 6,000 a week going to football practice.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    2,936
    Sounds to me like it was the original plan. An effort to control who we lose. We only lost one from the active roster the last two moves. lost one to replace an injured player, the second player let go was in effect from the practice squad. The move also shows class, He got to practice with the Broncos for a short period before being waved. The timing was right for him to land on an active roster.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    4,536
    Quote Originally Posted by KoolBreeze View Post
    If I was King, I would be pissed. He was going to be signed by Green Bay and we prevented that only to turn around and waive him.
    He's owed nothing. He needs to work on getting better so something like this doesn't happen again.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    61
    Why not waive Tamme instead, since Dressen is healthy? Keep King activated.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,264
    Quote Originally Posted by USMC_BRONCO View Post
    Why not waive Tamme instead, since Dressen is healthy? Keep King activated.
    Tamme is kept (for this year anyway) because he is on special teams and because he would certainly get more playing time if either Welker or JT were to get injured. Perhaps next year G.Robinson will take Tamme's roster spot.

    Releasing King may also mean the Broncos plan to give Decker a competitive offer to stay around.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,896
    Quote Originally Posted by Doogansquest View Post
    He's owed nothing. He needs to work on getting better so something like this doesn't happen again.
    Yeah, well, I never said he was owed anything but that is a poor way to treat somebody. They knew when they moved him to the active roster they were going to turn around and waive him. They cost him a shot a starting in Green Bay, at least for a while. If they didn't want him then the right thing to do would have been to just let Green Bay sign him.
    ”Those who would give up liberty for security, deserve neither.” Ben Franklin

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    34,502
    Quote Originally Posted by ELWAY421 View Post
    Do any of you think New England might sign him? I know Atlanta & Green Bay are the obvious choices but New England is sneaky like that.
    Eh, they are 6 deep with Amendola, Thompkins, Boyce, Edelman, Collie, and Dobson. I'd be surprised but who knows with them.

Posting Permissions

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