Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 65
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    4,165
    Quote Originally Posted by Dream View Post
    This is a half-truth, but I do think that the contracts do matter.

    Obviously Bly played at a high level this camp, but he wouldn't be benched over Foxworth even if he started to struggle. Too much investment in him.

    Where I agree that at some positions it might be different, but in regards to our players who have the big contracts - it does matter. IMO.
    I'm thinking that Alvin McKinley could be the next Jed Weaver if he doesn't perform up to snuff in camp.

    I think he'll keep 5 DEs and 5 DTs, with the 5 DEs being Ekuban, Moss, Dumervil, Crowder and then either Lang or Engelburger, and the 5 DTs being Gerard Warren, Sam Adams, Marcus Thomas and then 2 of the spots being between the next 4: Jimmy Kennedy, Antwon Burton, Demetrin Veal and Alvin McKinley.


    150 lbs of pure steel and sex appeal.

    D.J. 55's Mock Draft:


    Denver Broncos General Manager

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    6,952
    Quote Originally Posted by Lorcust View Post
    I'm thinking that Alvin McKinley could be the next Jed Weaver if he doesn't perform up to snuff in camp.

    I think he'll keep 5 DEs and 5 DTs, with the 5 DEs being Ekuban, Moss, Dumervil, Crowder and then either Lang or Engelburger, and the 5 DTs being Gerard Warren, Sam Adams, Marcus Thomas and then 2 of the spots being between the next 4: Jimmy Kennedy, Antwon Burton, Demetrin Veal and Alvin McKinley.
    As much as I disagreed with SoCal about Engleberger making the team, he seems to be really strong at keeping his assignments, controlling his area and containing well in the run game. We need that on first-down. I don't think Lang is as good in that regard, and with Ekuban, Dumervil and Moss (especially the last two) being solid pass rushers, I don't think we need him. Throw in Tim Crowder, and I don't see where Lang fits, unless we carry six ends which I just can't see us doing.

    I think McKinley stays. I don't think he was FOCUSED on in the camp reports, and where the guys on the Mane did a great job (have two interviews on my blog coming up with them) it's hard to get a look at everyone.

    McKinley can double as an end too, so his versatility should pay off. It'll be interesting to see. I know that on past defenses, Bates has usually had ten lineman. We can cut a guy (Ernster, TE, etc.) and make room for another. It'll just depend on how the flow of the roster is.

    Although it's not much, I don't see us cutting a guy we gave a four year deal, but then again, we did extend Veal and he's a possible cut too.

    Burton could probably be practice squaded again.

    If Kennedy gets cut, what a waste.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    4,165
    Quote Originally Posted by Dream View Post
    As much as I disagreed with SoCal about Engleberger making the team, he seems to be really strong at keeping his assignments, controlling his area and containing well in the run game. We need that on first-down. I don't think Lang is as good in that regard, and with Ekuban, Dumervil and Moss (especially the last two) being solid pass rushers, I don't think we need him. Throw in Tim Crowder, and I don't see where Lang fits, unless we carry six ends which I just can't see us doing.

    I think McKinley stays. I don't think he was FOCUSED on in the camp reports, and where the guys on the Mane did a great job (have two interviews on my blog coming up with them) it's hard to get a look at everyone.

    McKinley can double as an end too, so his versatility should pay off. It'll be interesting to see. I know that on past defenses, Bates has usually had ten lineman. We can cut a guy (Ernster, TE, etc.) and make room for another. It'll just depend on how the flow of the roster is.

    Although it's not much, I don't see us cutting a guy we gave a four year deal, but then again, we did extend Veal and he's a possible cut too.

    Burton could probably be practice squaded again.

    If Kennedy gets cut, what a waste.
    Think of the hilarity that ensues on this board from the armchair GMs though.

    You make good points though, the people I said were locks in my opinion were people who

    A) Have done well in camp

    or

    B) Are de facto starters

    We'll see what happens, but yeh, Lang looks like the odd man out.


    150 lbs of pure steel and sex appeal.

    D.J. 55's Mock Draft:


    Denver Broncos General Manager

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    6,952
    I try not and consider myself an armchair GM, nor do I like playing it - but any time you choose to throw away a draft choice for a guy who won't even make the team with the justification that, "Well, most sixth rounders don't make the team." - we have problems.

    I've always admired the way that Ted and Mike have been able to field competitive teams, but hearing Ted talking in interviews gives me an absolute headache. A few guys on the Mane seem to feel the same way, but because of personal contact with him though. "Met him once and that was enough."

    "Nuff said."

    But we'll see, hindsight is 20/20. I think Kennedy makes it.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    5,758
    Quote Originally Posted by MindField View Post
    This is just not true. Veal was very much involved in yesterday's practices, and I would make him the favorite to beat out Burton...now Kennedy is another story, but so far, he has not been impressive.

    People have been trying to write Veal off for two years, and he just keeps making the team...and he adds a different dimension to the D-Line, quickness.
    Personally, I think the attribute he most brings to the DL is "suckiness", but then the coaches don't seem to agree since they keep bringing him back.

    Could it be for his special teams play? He is FAST, which is an asset on special teams.

    Kennedy took up a draft pick, but he's going to need to show something to stick around, they're not just going to give it to him. Total waste of a pick though if he's cut.

    In fact, the front office was talking about signing him for next year if he pans out, so it's a disappointment that he's not even doing well enough to make the team.

    I wasn't optimistic he'd totally turn it around, but thought he'd at least be adequate. So far from everything I've read (I haven't been to any practices) it looks like MUG was right about him being worthless.

    Hard to believe he couldn't beat out Veal, but stranger things have happened.

    As for Engleberger, I've been waiting for him to be cut for years now. What the hell they see in him is beyond me and I give up!

    Another STs player as far as I can tell, he sucked hind-tit last year. But, then that's nothing new for him.

    I'm hoping that his stay on the 1st team is short-lived and that he gets the heave-ho. Some other player is going to have to do the heaving though and it doesn't sound like Lang is doing it. He'd be expensive to cut though, as far as I'm aware.

    If Kennedy is blowing chunks, and Burton is a useless scrub, then Veal has to like his chances.
    http://www.fbpages.me/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/159174168050152087_zRr4orMC_c.jpg

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Neptune
    Posts
    557
    Quote Originally Posted by stnzed View Post
    Fired? Etiquette? W..E!....
    I really, really need an explanation. Plzed?

    BTW, it's completely realistic that money is 'going through the motions' and Veal is fighting for his life. That kind of thing jumps out at you...even if money is infinitely more talented.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Neptune
    Posts
    557
    Quote Originally Posted by Dream View Post
    As much as I disagreed with SoCal about Engleberger making the team, he seems to be really strong at keeping his assignments, controlling his area and containing well in the run game. We need that on first-down. I don't think Lang is as good in that regard
    Alright brother, this is where I need some more detail. Can anyone provide evidence that E-berg is a superior DE to Lang? Explain what you mean by 'keeping his assignments'. I'm not trying to nit-pick, I'm trying to get to the real heart of the DE battle.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawgdriver View Post
    Alright brother, this is where I need some more detail. Can anyone provide evidence that E-berg is a superior DE to Lang? Explain what you mean by 'keeping his assignments'. I'm not trying to nit-pick, I'm trying to get to the real heart of the DE battle.
    Lang is very one dimensional and plays with one thing in mind, get after the ball. Unfortunately that means going to where you think the ball is. He gets caught out of position on misdirection and rollouts/boots etc. Engleberger doesn't an exceptional job of keeping his assignments and funnelling everything back toward the inside or making the play himself. He understands the importance of sealing the outside and makes plays by sealing and then 'richocheting' into the ball carrier. He's the best run defender at DE currently and it shows...most of the time. Yesterday he was the first one to take his pads off and stood around in his T/Undershirt while going through positional coaching post-practice.

    So, you have Lang that can get after the ball carrier and rush the QB w/speed and Engleberger who plays the run the best of our DEs. Lang, Moss, Dumervil, and Ekuban to an extent are similar players. Engleberger, Ekuban, and Crowder are similar players. When you look at it that way its pretty easy to see who the odd man out is. It was bound to be either Lang or Lang with the additon of Moss!!
    Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must first be overcome.
    Samuel Johnson

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Posts
    13,488
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawgdriver View Post
    Alright brother, this is where I need some more detail. Can anyone provide evidence that E-berg is a superior DE to Lang? Explain what you mean by 'keeping his assignments'. I'm not trying to nit-pick, I'm trying to get to the real heart of the DE battle.
    What Iceman said, plus the fact that the coaches, who are closely watching
    and evaluating the talent, are starting Engelberger. That's a pretty strong
    argument, isn't it?

    As a side note, according to Coach Scout, Engelberger has the fastest 40 time
    of all the defensive linemen. I really don't know what that means as a DE in
    comparison. Just a point of interest, that's all.

    -----

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Posts
    13,488
    Quote Originally Posted by !ceman View Post
    Lang is very one dimensional and plays with one thing in mind, get after the ball. Unfortunately that means going to where you think the ball is. He gets caught out of position on misdirection and rollouts/boots etc. Engleberger doesn't an exceptional job of keeping his assignments and funnelling everything back toward the inside or making the play himself. He understands the importance of sealing the outside and makes plays by sealing and then 'richocheting' into the ball carrier. He's the best run defender at DE currently and it shows...most of the time. Yesterday he was the first one to take his pads off and stood around in his T/Undershirt while going through positional coaching post-practice.

    So, you have Lang that can get after the ball carrier and rush the QB w/speed and Engleberger who plays the run the best of our DEs. Lang, Moss, Dumervil, and Ekuban to an extent are similar players. Engleberger, Ekuban, and Crowder are similar players. When you look at it that way its pretty easy to see who the odd man out is. It was bound to be either Lang or Lang with the additon of Moss!!
    You mean "does," don't you?

    -----

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Aurora, CO
    Posts
    375
    for what it is worth when Adams has sat out the morning practices, it has been Kennedy to fill in his spot on the A defense... I think that says something about who they are looking at...

    And as for Engleberger, i think he is a worthy of a spot and a temporary starter until moss moss matures. I really dont think Engleberger is going to be at the position for the whole year, but he was good last year in his limited role, both in pass and run defense....

    I am not sure if Veal is going to be around, and based on what we have seen in the depth chart ths far it seems if kennedy does well it is his spot to lose

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by topscribe View Post
    You mean "does," don't you?

    -----
    yup..........
    Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must first be overcome.
    Samuel Johnson

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Locker #55
    Posts
    5,015
    Everything i have read this year as far as D-Line goes, is this. Most of the reports i have read are focusing on the DE spot. We know that Engleberger is playing first team.

    We havent heard much from the interior line just snippets. The most we have heard is that Adams is top notch but doesnt have the Stamina.

    We'll find out more tommorow when the DC comes out tommorow.

    If it was up to me id go like this

    DE
    EE, JE, JM, TC, ED.


    DT

    SA, GW, JK, MT,AM.
    The fool who fancies he is full of wisdom
    While he sits by his hearth at home.
    Quickly finds when questioned by others .
    That he knows nothing at all.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    9,738
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawgdriver View Post
    I really, really need an explanation. Plzed?

    BTW, it's completely realistic that money is 'going through the motions' and Veal is fighting for his life. That kind of thing jumps out at you...even if money is infinitely more talented.

    Means What....Ever!

    Btw, that's what I'm afraid of! Money losing out to Veal because he's freakin lazy! The Broncos need Warren, not some 288lb journeyman.....
    Last edited by stnzed; 08-05-2007 at 01:12 PM.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    5,758
    Quote Originally Posted by stnzed View Post
    Means What....Ever!

    Btw, that's what I'm afraid of! Money losing out to Veal because he's freakin lazy! The Broncos need Warren, not some 288lb journeyman.....
    Relax! The chances of Warren being cut to make room for Veal are ZERO! Warren is penciled in as one starter and it's between Veal, Kennedy, and the rest to back up Adams at the other spot.

    No way they cut Warren and keep Veal because he's NOT a starter.

    Now NEXT year, Big Money could be gone, gone, gone. But, not this year!
    http://www.fbpages.me/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/159174168050152087_zRr4orMC_c.jpg

Posting Permissions

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