Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 70
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    35,729
    I agree with many of the comments above.

    Too often we cite the way it used to be, which does not apply as strictly as it once did. Teams will win in spite of a defect here or there, because their recipe worked a little better that particular year. And as has been mentioned, sometimes coaching decisions/strategy are the only difference. The guy involved with the Atlanta SB loss to The pats sure did have a repeat role in this year's outcome.

    There is no one magic formula for success....but there is a way of giving yourself a chance. Hire good coaches, know who you want to be, manage the cap, find the players that suit the model, coach them up, design good plans/plays, and after much practice...execute.

    Even though this league has a serious copy cat component, I prefer not to expect that what works one year, will work the next. Novelty is great, but novelty loses its novelty. Teams must keep looking for the winning way, and it is based on hard work and constant reassessment.

    So you commit to a plan, one that might take a few years, and you maximize within its context. And the job never stops. Because every edge you get is a competitive advantage.

    But for me, you try to build the best O and best D you can, simultaneously. You can not expect one to far outweigh the other, and be highly successful.
    Last edited by CanDB; 02-29-2020 at 02:05 PM.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    4,505
    Ben Allbright said the Broncos plan is to buy a D (free agency) and draft an O. This doesn't mean we won't draft a D in the first if the right player is there, just that its their basic strategy.

    I've always been a supporter of emphasizing oline play. But times are changing. The rules give WRs a bigger advantage than in the past. Also we now have real dual threat QBs so teams have to play a S in the box to play the QB run. This gives WRs even more of an advantage than they had in the past.

    IMO we need two of each, WR and OL. McGovern can be one of the OL but we still need another AND have to cross our fingers with Bolles and James. Both Hamilton and Patrick have had two years and look to be OK, but they don't scare Ds or force defensive coordinators to plan for them in any way.

    I still say we can trade down from 15 to 22-24 and get either Shenault or Reagor and pick up an extra 3rd we can use on OL either in the draft, trade or both.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,986
    Quote Originally Posted by L.M. View Post
    Because it was their weakness not so long ago. Once they got Spags and patched a couple holes they got a little closer to the balance point. It's still all about their O though, that D can't actually carry the team, but it's good enough, especially when they have the lead or they need to step up and aid an offensive rally (and I don't mean the political ones).
    I am not saying the Chiefs were terrible on D. Early in the superbowl they looked terrible. They were lucky to not be down many more points. In the third quarter the 49ers were running over them. In the 4th they were lucky from poor play calling, but they did get some stops. Early in the game they weren't getting any.

    Do we say the D one the game because they made two key stops in the 4th quarter? Do we say the D won the game because of a bend but no broke approach? Do we say the D won the game because the 49ers stopped running the ball and put it in Jimmy G's hand? Sure I understand the point, they made some plays down the stretch. But IMO the D did not win that game.

    Several times this year the Chiefs D looked vulnerable, especially to the run. I totally agree with this statement their D is "good enough? and their offense carries the team.

    this has been such a fun discussion. Love hearing all perspectives.

    My view is that our D is "good enough" assuming that we don't take a step backwards. Especially our pass D. I think our coach helps on that side. I want to make sure we are at least as good as we are last year.

    On offense, not so much. We need to score more points. We also have a young QB that would be great to have others growing with him. I would love to pickup a couple of OL (at least) in this draft.

    I also think this is a crazy deep WR pool. It would be unfortunate to not take advantage of it. I think it is realistic that when we pick in the 2nd, and 3rd rounds the BPA will be a WR. There is a decent chance we could be facing the same situation in round 1. If their is a stud WR and we have him as the BPA we should take him. I wouldn't even be opposed to 2 of them. We need players. The reality of today's NFL is that explosive play makers are difference makers.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    35,729
    Quote Originally Posted by lvbronx View Post
    Ben Allbright said the Broncos plan is to buy a D (free agency) and draft an O. This doesn't mean we won't draft a D in the first if the right player is there, just that its their basic strategy.

    I've always been a supporter of emphasizing oline play. But times are changing. The rules give WRs a bigger advantage than in the past. Also we now have real dual threat QBs so teams have to play a S in the box to play the QB run. This gives WRs even more of an advantage than they had in the past.

    IMO we need two of each, WR and OL. McGovern can be one of the OL but we still need another AND have to cross our fingers with Bolles and James. Both Hamilton and Patrick have had two years and look to be OK, but they don't scare Ds or force defensive coordinators to plan for them in any way.

    I still say we can trade down from 15 to 22-24 and get either Shenault or Reagor and pick up an extra 3rd we can use on OL either in the draft, trade or both.
    Is this is a commonly held belief in and around Denver? I am not close enough to the scene to know what's buzzing in terms of this offseason.

    I would not be averse to it, because I love the Oline/WR group in The Draft. I firmly believe that once we upgrade those two facets of our game, we should be heavy duty into D, in FA and in The draft....because I sense we could be declining as a unit, especially if we lose some D leadership. Therefore correct the course enough so that the overall production of the group might rise instead of decline. I can definitely see a need to acquire players in the interior, and definitely in the backfield. And you never have enough pass rushers.

    But yes....lets land 2 Oliners and 2 WRs, maybe all in The Draft, though I'd prefer one WR in FA. And outside of those 4 O players, I might only want one or two more offensive players....maybe a mid round back that fills a gap.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    2,978
    Folks are getting enamored with WR’s for good reason, myself included.

    It heavily depends on what we do in FA, but let’s be real about where we currently sit at #15 in the 1st round.

    We’re in a range where we could land the third-best WR in the draft or one of either Jeudy/Lamb if one falls to us. The sheer talent and value of the wide receivers at where we pick is much better than any other position. WR3 in the draft for me is Ruggs III— who currently has Top 15 value and would be the WR1 in any other draft.

    For the OL folks, it is very likely that Wills, Becton, Wirfs, AND Thomas are all gone by our pick. The next best OT (Josh Jones) has late-1st round value. What about IOL? Cesar Ruiz and Cushenberry III have early 2nd round projections at the moment.

    For sure the DL folks, experts have been projecting Brown and Kinlaw to be gone by #15. Kinlaw has a chance to possibly slide to us if there is a run on QB’s, OT’s, or WR’s. After them, there is Epenesa (not particularly a scheme fit— and late 1st value) and others who are rated as fringe 1st rounders.

    Other positions of need like CB and LB also may not make sense at #15. I like Kristian Fulton as a possibility in the 1st though. Otherwise, other prospects from those positions do not fall in our premium range.

    After all of this, one may be thinking— why not trade down? Here’s why I am firmly against that idea. We already have 12 picks, with 5 coming in the first three rounds. Our team could use some top-end talent on the roster. I would like to stay put or even trade UP if an elite guy like Simmons or Jeudy falls.

    For everyone arguing that we used a “luxury” pick on Fant last year as a reason for not drafting a WR— when the offense lacks consistent receiving playmakers for Lock (outside of Sutton) this upcoming season, do not complain. We are in a prime spot to get somebody to draw defensive attention away from our young Pro Bowler, in addition to surrounding our 2nd-year QB with more reliable offensive threats.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    35,729
    Quote Originally Posted by HDbroncos02 View Post
    Folks are getting enamored with WR’s for good reason, myself included.

    It heavily depends on what we do in FA, but let’s be real about where we currently sit at #15 in the 1st round.

    We’re in a range where we could land the third-best WR in the draft or one of either Jeudy/Lamb if one falls to us. The sheer talent and value of the wide receivers at where we pick is much better than any other position. WR3 in the draft for me is Ruggs III— who currently has Top 15 value and would be the WR1 in any other draft.

    For the OL folks, it is very likely that Wills, Becton, Wirfs, AND Thomas are all gone by our pick. The next best OT (Josh Jones) has late-1st round value. What about IOL? Cesar Ruiz and Cushenberry III have early 2nd round projections at the moment.

    For sure the DL folks, experts have been projecting Brown and Kinlaw to be gone by #15. Kinlaw has a chance to possibly slide to us if there is a run on QB’s, OT’s, or WR’s. After them, there is Epenesa (not particularly a scheme fit— and late 1st value) and others who are rated as fringe 1st rounders.

    Other positions of need like CB and LB also may not make sense at #15. I like Kristian Fulton as a possibility in the 1st though. Otherwise, other prospects from those positions do not fall in our premium range.

    After all of this, one may be thinking— why not trade down? Here’s why I am firmly against that idea. We already have 12 picks, with 5 coming in the first three rounds. Our team could use some top-end talent on the roster. I would like to stay put or even trade UP if an elite guy like Simmons or Jeudy falls.

    For everyone arguing that we used a “luxury” pick on Fant last year as a reason for not drafting a WR— when the offense lacks consistent receiving playmakers for Lock (outside of Sutton) this upcoming season, do not complain. We are in a prime spot to get somebody to draw defensive attention away from our young Pro Bowler, in addition to surrounding our 2nd-year QB with more reliable offensive threats.
    Well stated. I am still not sure about taking a WR at 15, or moving up for one, but pending how things go in FA, I might just love it!

    Yes, I am enamoured by this group of WRs, but so are many, many people. And that brings me back to the theory that, if we play our cards right, we might end up with a really good WR with our 2nd pick, which would not be that terrible given the depth of this class.

    I guess I want weapons, as do most, but I just need some security knowing that our Oline will be there for Lock and the crew. If I get that good feeling, then bombs away with a WR!!!

    As an aside, I would love to have Simmons, but he'll probably be gone 5-10, and the cost to acquire him will be substantial. In fact, his stock keeps rising, even though he came in highly regarded!

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    6,548
    Quote Originally Posted by myoung View Post

    On offense, not so much. We need to score more points. We also have a young QB that would be great to have others growing with him. I would love to pickup a couple of OL (at least) in this draft.

    .

    I don't disagree, but I would hope an offense who is practically returning everyone, just got a new OC, and has 9 key guys still on rookie contracts would show improvement without wholesale changes. I am not saying ignore the offense, add a RB, WR, TE, and solidify McGovern and Leary's spot and let them grow together like you want. These additions can come FA or rounds 3 or later imho. This O, outside of a bad weather game in KC, scored an avg of 26 points in their 4 wins....not too shabby.
    Ravens GM 2016 - Ravens are looking to trade down 4-8 spots

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,986
    Quote Originally Posted by MHSalute View Post
    I don't disagree, but I would hope an offense who is practically returning everyone, just got a new OC, and has 9 key guys still on rookie contracts would show improvement without wholesale changes. I am not saying ignore the offense, add a RB, WR, TE, and solidify McGovern and Leary's spot and let them grow together like you want. These additions can come FA or rounds 3 or later imho. This O, outside of a bad weather game in KC, scored an avg of 26 points in their 4 wins....not too shabby.
    I guess we just see things differently. I watched a team that struggled to score, even in the last game of the season against a Raiders team that was pretty bad.

    I don't disagree that a new OC will help, but if you compare our talent with other offenses I think we are lacking. I like the building blocks we have in Lock, Sutton, Fant, and Risner. But IMO we could use a couple more WRs and at least 2 OL. I look at our offense and see plenty of room to upgrade talent. I think our talent closely represents the year end team stats (which put us bottom 5 in the league in almost every category).

    I am just happy we finally have a QB with potential

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    4,505
    Quote Originally Posted by CanDB View Post
    Is this is a commonly held belief in and around Denver? I am not close enough to the scene to know what's buzzing in terms of this offseason.

    I would not be averse to it, because I love the Oline/WR group in The Draft. I firmly believe that once we upgrade those two facets of our game, we should be heavy duty into D, in FA and in The draft....because I sense we could be declining as a unit, especially if we lose some D leadership. Therefore correct the course enough so that the overall production of the group might rise instead of decline. I can definitely see a need to acquire players in the interior, and definitely in the backfield. And you never have enough pass rushers.

    But yes....lets land 2 Oliners and 2 WRs, maybe all in The Draft, though I'd prefer one WR in FA. And outside of those 4 O players, I might only want one or two more offensive players....maybe a mid round back that fills a gap.
    I think so, at least with the local media. Allbright is a former NFL scout and now works for the Broncos as an on-air Bronco pundit. He's generally well-respected.

    Again, it's isn't written in stone. If Chase Young falls to 15 the Broncos will likely take him.

    The draft seems heavy with OL and WR and IMO we need two of each, so this does make some sense as there's a good chance the best player available at the time will be a WR or OL.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    the treasure valley, Idaho
    Posts
    16,563
    This is the first time I can remember the receivers group being faster and deeper than the corners group. I don’t think they’re being overvalued.

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    35,729
    Quote Originally Posted by lvbronx View Post
    I think so, at least with the local media. Allbright is a former NFL scout and now works for the Broncos as an on-air Bronco pundit. He's generally well-respected.

    Again, it's isn't written in stone. If Chase Young falls to 15 the Broncos will likely take him.

    The draft seems heavy with OL and WR and IMO we need two of each, so this does make some sense as there's a good chance the best player available at the time will be a WR or OL.
    Thx for that!

    I think I have read this same comment more than a couple of times, so maybe it has life.

    In the end I agree with you. Unless we sign some in FA, I can see 2 Oliners and 2 WRs in The Draft. AND I completely agree....if Chase Young slides, or Simmons, get the gang together and rethink the plan!!! This would necessitate that Elway needs a Plan B or even C, if so!

    On that note, that's why I wish we could satisfy either an Oline or WR need in FA...even just one of the 4 we talk about, because if we can land a bigger fish so to speak, it would make Plan B easier. In this case, I'd prefer we go FA for an Oliner (even if we acquire a decent but not star type), because I can almost guarantee that we can find a quality WR with our 2nd pick!

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    35,729
    Quote Originally Posted by Al Wilson 4 Mayor View Post
    This is the first time I can remember the receivers group being faster and deeper than the corners group. I don’t think they’re being overvalued.
    Plus they can catch better!!!

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    the treasure valley, Idaho
    Posts
    16,563
    Quote Originally Posted by CanDB View Post
    Plus they can catch better!!!
    Haha, indeed!

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    35,729
    Quote Originally Posted by Al Wilson 4 Mayor View Post
    Haha, indeed!
    No kidding, I just watched a bit of today's drills, and within no time I saw CBs making weird looking attempts at catching balls. Even Okudah. Then again, I did not give them a lot of viewing. BUT these guys are still very, very valuable, even if the old saying still goes, that Dbacks are WRs who weren't good at receiving....

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    540
    I hesitate to say we should get one of the top 3 WRs at 15. Obviously it depends on how the board falls, but I'd rather take an OLineman in the 1st because the dropoff is steeper into the 2nd and 3rd rounds than WR this year. I truly believe we can get a good no.2 in the middle 3rd but the same cant be said about the Oline or CBs

Posting Permissions

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