| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Which one is the problem? |
| Where he was picked? |
|
53% |
[ 16 ] |
| The player? |
|
10% |
[ 3 ] |
| Both? |
|
36% |
[ 11 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 30 |
|
| Author |
Message |
thebestever6
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 1428
|
 Posted: Thu May 24, 2012 12:10 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| AnAngryAmerican wrote: | | paul-mac wrote: | I'm just messing with you man. Y so serious?  |
Levity is great and much needed at times. But, as a moderator, I have to quash potential problems before they become real problems. You had back-to-back posts that weren't contributing to the discussion so I felt something needed to be said. I hope you don't think it was personal. 
| elliot878 wrote: | But you've said you would be ok with Elway becoming enamored with a QB and taking him in the first round in the next year or two.
Many believe if Osweiller waited a year he would be a first round pick. Could it be that Elway just saw good value in a very strong QB class and went for it? Could turn out to have been a major bargain pick. |
What I have a problem with is Elway taking someone - anyone - with a premium pick, which a second rounder no doubt is, who cannot help us win a Super Bowl now or in the very, very near future. You take your developmental players later on; i.e. Malik Jackson in the 5th as a potential future replacement for Robert Ayers. You just don't spend a second rounder on someone who won't see the field for several seasons, sheesh even Matt Millen had to be rolling his eyes at that decision.
| elliot878 wrote: | The McDaniels argument is fair - but still crap. I really could care less how bad of a head coach and gm Josh McDaniels was, you cannot sit here behind your computer and say that you, or anyone else on this board was more qualified to make those decisions then McDaniels was. I'm not making excuses for McDaniels, just saying its not wise to think anyone on this board is/was more qualified than McDaniels was.
The draft is a crap shoot every year. Some teams do it better than others, but no team/front office group has had a great draft every single year.
Let's see the players play, reserve our judgment for later. These kids are getting scrutinized way too harshly already. None of us are scouts, or front office people, or draft analysts, and no scout or draft analyst or front office man is ever 100% right on all their pre-draft player grades.
Getting mad over picks before they've even played is just an effort in futility.
I used to spew off and freak out like I knew something about these players pre-draft. In the last year I've come to realize even with all the studying and research I do, and we all do, I/we still don't know squat compared to what the Broncos front office knew about these guys going into the draft - even if all the players careers don't pan out the way we want. |
We're all here as passionate, well-informed fans and that makes us armchair GMs and Head Coaches. The major industry that is sports commentary - reporters, columnists, radio hosts, bloggers, etc - all rely on that. Sometimes we're right (as I was with just about everything that happened with the Broncos between January 2009 and December 2010) and sometimes we're wrong (as I was when I said we should have drafted Dareus rather than Von). But if all everyone did was sit back and say, "the FO knows more than we do so let's just wait and see" we wouldn't have a forum, let alone sports talk radio and other mediums.
| thebestever6 wrote: | | I completley agree with you, and you my friend are using logic. The Broncos interviewed Osweiler, they worked him out, and they watched countless hours of tape on him. I have not had all of those privileges, but I have read many positive things of Osweiler. I read that he is a leader that had to come from some where people don't just come out and say people are leaders. I have read he is extremely smart people didn't pull that from thin air, I have seen him in interviews on with John Gruden he is extremely confident he isnt cocky because he seems to be a hard worker always working to get better he worked extremely hard on his release all off season and Fox said it shows. From his clips he looks like he has all the tools, and he has all the potential. |
I don't disagree with any of that. And, more than just watch interviews and highlight clips online, I was at Dove Valley on Monday and watched him play in person. He's a great guy and as I have said time and time and time again he's got loads of potential. However, are we trying to win a Super Bowl or just post a winning record? If we're trying to win a Super Bowl then there were other moves we could have made rather than drafting a QB who will barely get to practice, let alone start, for the next 3-5 years.
I have no problem with Osweiler himself, as a person or as a prospect. If Tebow were still our QB I'd be Osweiler's biggest champion right now. But, after signing Peyton, our window is short and we would have been better off taking a player who could HELP US WIN A SUPER BOWL in this short window, rather than worry about what's going to transpire at the QB position 3-5 years down the road.
| thebestever6 wrote: | | So to posters like AAA who hate the pick because we had other needs. What if in 3 years Osweiler is better or just as good as Luck the number one pick?? It can totally happen Luck was picked number one because he is considered the safest pick, and the best prospect since Elway. What if Elway picks the better long term answer, and Luck is the biggest bust ever? You never know it is the NFL if Manning was 29, and no big injury history I'd agree with everyone who hates this pick. |
Are you arguing that Osweiler has better long-term potential than Luck? Even by elliot's logic that's foolish because Luck was deemed, not just by media pontificaters and draft guru websites, but by a NFL front office run by football professionals to be the best player in the draft.
I'm not playing the "what if" game. What if the Myans are right and humanity's final day is December 21? What if tomorrow Scarlett Johansson knocks on my door and asks me to marry her?
I don't care what Osweiler develops into four or five years from now. I'm interested in the Broncos contending for the Super Bowl this year, next year and the year after with Peyton Manning. Right now, I don't care if we can compete for a Super Bowl in 2018.
What if in 1995 Mike Shanahan had taken the advice that you (and most around here) suggest and rather than try to win a Super Bowl with John Elway, Steve Atwater, Shannon Sharpe, Alfred Williams and Gary Zimmerman in the next few years, he worried about what would happen in 2001? I sure would have missed going those two parades.... |
I honestly think you need balance you need to concentrate on the long term and short term. Philly took Kolb in 07' in the second round and Mcnabbs' slills diminished by the end of 09'. The Vikings were focused primarily on a championship in 09' and 10' they used your' philosophy and once Favre went down they had nothing and had to reach on Ponder last year. The Patriots picked Mallet in the 3rd round even though they had Brady and there D sucked last year. I have no problem for the Broncos thinking for now and the future. Sure there are other routes they could of went in the second, but they still got an explosive back, a dt, a olb that can play special teams and can cover, two corners in free agency, and two TE's. Me as a fan I am more disgusted by the fact that they let Bunkley walk rather than drafting Osweiler. Bunkley would of helped this team the next 3 years more than any player drafted at pick 57 so that should be a bigger problem than drafting Osweiler.
_________________
Props to Deadpulse for the Sig:
Big Palooka wrote:
"They don't have to worry about him making consistent passes. They will win another 2-3 max with him at QB." |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Army
Joined: 26 Mar 2010
Posts: 1402
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Thu May 24, 2012 4:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| paul-mac wrote: | | AnAngryAmerican wrote: | | elliot878 wrote: | | but none of us are as qualified to make these decisions as the guys in the Broncos front office, and no one who runs a draft website is as qualified as the guys in the Broncos front office. |
I remember this argument being made by the McDaniels apologists in defending selections of Alphonso Smith and Richard Quinn, among others.
As I've said many times, the problem with the Osweiler pick is not entirely or even mostly about him as a player. I think he potential, I love his size and his big arm. But it was foolish to spend a 2nd round pick on a player who will not see the field for duration of his rookie contract. |
You didn't hear? We are converting Osweiler to TE to compete with Dreessen and leaving Hanie as the backup QB  |
Hilarious!!
At least to those of us who can still have a sense of humor concerning the clear and obvious reference. I remember when it was seriously being discussed on this very board how the guy who ended up being our starting QB should either play as an H-back or, get this, play on Special Teams. And now, when the reference is aimed at Manute Osweiler, the suggestion is correctly seen as a "joke".
Just as it was a year ago. Thanks for the levity, Paul-Mac! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
paul-mac
Joined: 12 Jul 2009
Posts: 6435
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Thu May 24, 2012 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| AnAngryAmerican wrote: | | paul-mac wrote: | | I'm just messing with you man. Y so serious? |
Levity is great and much needed at times. But, as a moderator, I have to quash potential problems before they become real problems. You had back-to-back posts that weren't contributing to the discussion so I felt something needed to be said. I hope you don't think it was personal.
| elliot878 wrote: | But you've said you would be ok with Elway becoming enamored with a QB and taking him in the first round in the next year or two.
Many believe if Osweiller waited a year he would be a first round pick. Could it be that Elway just saw good value in a very strong QB class and went for it? Could turn out to have been a major bargain pick. |
What I have a problem with is Elway taking someone - anyone - with a premium pick, which a second rounder no doubt is, who cannot help us win a Super Bowl now or in the very, very near future. You take your developmental players later on; i.e. Malik Jackson in the 5th as a potential future replacement for Robert Ayers. You just don't spend a second rounder on someone who won't see the field for several seasons, sheesh even Matt Millen had to be rolling his eyes at that decision.
| elliot878 wrote: | The McDaniels argument is fair - but still crap. I really could care less how bad of a head coach and gm Josh McDaniels was, you cannot sit here behind your computer and say that you, or anyone else on this board was more qualified to make those decisions then McDaniels was. I'm not making excuses for McDaniels, just saying its not wise to think anyone on this board is/was more qualified than McDaniels was.
The draft is a crap shoot every year. Some teams do it better than others, but no team/front office group has had a great draft every single year.
Let's see the players play, reserve our judgment for later. These kids are getting scrutinized way too harshly already. None of us are scouts, or front office people, or draft analysts, and no scout or draft analyst or front office man is ever 100% right on all their pre-draft player grades.
Getting mad over picks before they've even played is just an effort in futility.
I used to spew off and freak out like I knew something about these players pre-draft. In the last year I've come to realize even with all the studying and research I do, and we all do, I/we still don't know squat compared to what the Broncos front office knew about these guys going into the draft - even if all the players careers don't pan out the way we want. |
We're all here as passionate, well-informed fans and that makes us armchair GMs and Head Coaches. The major industry that is sports commentary - reporters, columnists, radio hosts, bloggers, etc - all rely on that. Sometimes we're right (as I was with just about everything that happened with the Broncos between January 2009 and December 2010) and sometimes we're wrong (as I was when I said we should have drafted Dareus rather than Von). But if all everyone did was sit back and say, "the FO knows more than we do so let's just wait and see" we wouldn't have a forum, let alone sports talk radio and other mediums.
| thebestever6 wrote: | | I completley agree with you, and you my friend are using logic. The Broncos interviewed Osweiler, they worked him out, and they watched countless hours of tape on him. I have not had all of those privileges, but I have read many positive things of Osweiler. I read that he is a leader that had to come from some where people don't just come out and say people are leaders. I have read he is extremely smart people didn't pull that from thin air, I have seen him in interviews on with John Gruden he is extremely confident he isnt cocky because he seems to be a hard worker always working to get better he worked extremely hard on his release all off season and Fox said it shows. From his clips he looks like he has all the tools, and he has all the potential. |
I don't disagree with any of that. And, more than just watch interviews and highlight clips online, I was at Dove Valley on Monday and watched him play in person. He's a great guy and as I have said time and time and time again he's got loads of potential. However, are we trying to win a Super Bowl or just post a winning record? If we're trying to win a Super Bowl then there were other moves we could have made rather than drafting a QB who will barely get to practice, let alone start, for the next 3-5 years.
I have no problem with Osweiler himself, as a person or as a prospect. If Tebow were still our QB I'd be Osweiler's biggest champion right now. But, after signing Peyton, our window is short and we would have been better off taking a player who could HELP US WIN A SUPER BOWL in this short window, rather than worry about what's going to transpire at the QB position 3-5 years down the road.
| thebestever6 wrote: | | So to posters like AAA who hate the pick because we had other needs. What if in 3 years Osweiler is better or just as good as Luck the number one pick?? It can totally happen Luck was picked number one because he is considered the safest pick, and the best prospect since Elway. What if Elway picks the better long term answer, and Luck is the biggest bust ever? You never know it is the NFL if Manning was 29, and no big injury history I'd agree with everyone who hates this pick. |
Are you arguing that Osweiler has better long-term potential than Luck? Even by elliot's logic that's foolish because Luck was deemed, not just by media pontificaters and draft guru websites, but by a NFL front office run by football professionals to be the best player in the draft.
I'm not playing the "what if" game. What if the Myans are right and humanity's final day is December 21? What if tomorrow Scarlett Johansson knocks on my door and asks me to marry her?
I don't care what Osweiler develops into four or five years from now. I'm interested in the Broncos contending for the Super Bowl this year, next year and the year after with Peyton Manning. Right now, I don't care if we can compete for a Super Bowl in 2018.
What if in 1995 Mike Shanahan had taken the advice that you (and most around here) suggest and rather than try to win a Super Bowl with John Elway, Steve Atwater, Shannon Sharpe, Alfred Williams and Gary Zimmerman in the next few years, he worried about what would happen in 2001? I sure would have missed going those two parades.... |
It's alright man, just doing your job
_________________
| Big Palooka wrote: | | Broncos won't make the playoffs |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
elliot878
Joined: 03 Feb 2007
Posts: 9565
Location: Connecticut
|
| Posted: Thu May 24, 2012 5:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| thebestever6 wrote: | | AnAngryAmerican wrote: | | paul-mac wrote: | | I'm just messing with you man. Y so serious? |
Levity is great and much needed at times. But, as a moderator, I have to quash potential problems before they become real problems. You had back-to-back posts that weren't contributing to the discussion so I felt something needed to be said. I hope you don't think it was personal.
| elliot878 wrote: | But you've said you would be ok with Elway becoming enamored with a QB and taking him in the first round in the next year or two.
Many believe if Osweiller waited a year he would be a first round pick. Could it be that Elway just saw good value in a very strong QB class and went for it? Could turn out to have been a major bargain pick. |
What I have a problem with is Elway taking someone - anyone - with a premium pick, which a second rounder no doubt is, who cannot help us win a Super Bowl now or in the very, very near future. You take your developmental players later on; i.e. Malik Jackson in the 5th as a potential future replacement for Robert Ayers. You just don't spend a second rounder on someone who won't see the field for several seasons, sheesh even Matt Millen had to be rolling his eyes at that decision.
| elliot878 wrote: | The McDaniels argument is fair - but still crap. I really could care less how bad of a head coach and gm Josh McDaniels was, you cannot sit here behind your computer and say that you, or anyone else on this board was more qualified to make those decisions then McDaniels was. I'm not making excuses for McDaniels, just saying its not wise to think anyone on this board is/was more qualified than McDaniels was.
The draft is a crap shoot every year. Some teams do it better than others, but no team/front office group has had a great draft every single year.
Let's see the players play, reserve our judgment for later. These kids are getting scrutinized way too harshly already. None of us are scouts, or front office people, or draft analysts, and no scout or draft analyst or front office man is ever 100% right on all their pre-draft player grades.
Getting mad over picks before they've even played is just an effort in futility.
I used to spew off and freak out like I knew something about these players pre-draft. In the last year I've come to realize even with all the studying and research I do, and we all do, I/we still don't know squat compared to what the Broncos front office knew about these guys going into the draft - even if all the players careers don't pan out the way we want. |
We're all here as passionate, well-informed fans and that makes us armchair GMs and Head Coaches. The major industry that is sports commentary - reporters, columnists, radio hosts, bloggers, etc - all rely on that. Sometimes we're right (as I was with just about everything that happened with the Broncos between January 2009 and December 2010) and sometimes we're wrong (as I was when I said we should have drafted Dareus rather than Von). But if all everyone did was sit back and say, "the FO knows more than we do so let's just wait and see" we wouldn't have a forum, let alone sports talk radio and other mediums.
| thebestever6 wrote: | | I completley agree with you, and you my friend are using logic. The Broncos interviewed Osweiler, they worked him out, and they watched countless hours of tape on him. I have not had all of those privileges, but I have read many positive things of Osweiler. I read that he is a leader that had to come from some where people don't just come out and say people are leaders. I have read he is extremely smart people didn't pull that from thin air, I have seen him in interviews on with John Gruden he is extremely confident he isnt cocky because he seems to be a hard worker always working to get better he worked extremely hard on his release all off season and Fox said it shows. From his clips he looks like he has all the tools, and he has all the potential. |
I don't disagree with any of that. And, more than just watch interviews and highlight clips online, I was at Dove Valley on Monday and watched him play in person. He's a great guy and as I have said time and time and time again he's got loads of potential. However, are we trying to win a Super Bowl or just post a winning record? If we're trying to win a Super Bowl then there were other moves we could have made rather than drafting a QB who will barely get to practice, let alone start, for the next 3-5 years.
I have no problem with Osweiler himself, as a person or as a prospect. If Tebow were still our QB I'd be Osweiler's biggest champion right now. But, after signing Peyton, our window is short and we would have been better off taking a player who could HELP US WIN A SUPER BOWL in this short window, rather than worry about what's going to transpire at the QB position 3-5 years down the road.
| thebestever6 wrote: | | So to posters like AAA who hate the pick because we had other needs. What if in 3 years Osweiler is better or just as good as Luck the number one pick?? It can totally happen Luck was picked number one because he is considered the safest pick, and the best prospect since Elway. What if Elway picks the better long term answer, and Luck is the biggest bust ever? You never know it is the NFL if Manning was 29, and no big injury history I'd agree with everyone who hates this pick. |
Are you arguing that Osweiler has better long-term potential than Luck? Even by elliot's logic that's foolish because Luck was deemed, not just by media pontificaters and draft guru websites, but by a NFL front office run by football professionals to be the best player in the draft.
I'm not playing the "what if" game. What if the Myans are right and humanity's final day is December 21? What if tomorrow Scarlett Johansson knocks on my door and asks me to marry her?
I don't care what Osweiler develops into four or five years from now. I'm interested in the Broncos contending for the Super Bowl this year, next year and the year after with Peyton Manning. Right now, I don't care if we can compete for a Super Bowl in 2018.
What if in 1995 Mike Shanahan had taken the advice that you (and most around here) suggest and rather than try to win a Super Bowl with John Elway, Steve Atwater, Shannon Sharpe, Alfred Williams and Gary Zimmerman in the next few years, he worried about what would happen in 2001? I sure would have missed going those two parades.... |
I honestly think you need balance you need to concentrate on the long term and short term. Philly took Kolb in 07' in the second round and Mcnabbs' slills diminished by the end of 09'. The Vikings were focused primarily on a championship in 09' and 10' they used your' philosophy and once Favre went down they had nothing and had to reach on Ponder last year. The Patriots picked Mallet in the 3rd round even though they had Brady and there D sucked last year. I have no problem for the Broncos thinking for now and the future. Sure there are other routes they could of went in the second, but they still got an explosive back, a dt, a olb that can play special teams and can cover, two corners in free agency, and two TE's. Me as a fan I am more disgusted by the fact that they let Bunkley walk rather than drafting Osweiler. Bunkley would of helped this team the next 3 years more than any player drafted at pick 57 so that should be a bigger problem than drafting Osweiler. |
This is a pretty good point.
All I was trying to do in here was temper the hate that so many are showing Osweiller.
While Armchair GM'ing is what we do around here, and its fun, we need to realize that we don't have the information the FO has on these guys. To disagree with a pick and make an argument someone else would have been a better pick is fine. To get genuinely mad at a pick, lose sleep over it, and then take it out/dislike the player that became a Bronco instead of your guy though? Little unfair. Little more dramatic.
As far as Matt Millen rolling his eyes? C'mon. The Packers took Rodgers with a first rounder while Brett Favre was still playing great football. They made that pick for the future. Now AAA I know you'll argue that Rodgers was a special player who could have (should have) gone number one overall. 20 something teams passed on Rodgers after the 9ers didn't take him. Is it because they had no use for a QB now or in the future? Probably not. Is it because they were drafting solely on position of need? Probably not. Do the 20 teams who passed on him regret passing on the value - most likely. It is very possible that Elway thought he saw value in Osweiller at 57. The day of the draft I listened to more than one radio analyst list Osweiller as a possibility at 25 for the Broncos. I think Elway saw Osweiller as a bargain at 57. Yes we'll have to wait, but I do believe Elway thinks he got, in Osweiller, a player who will develop into a much better player than anyone else we could have gotten at 57. That is my guess for Elway's thought process behind the pick, he saw it as a bargain that will pay off down the road.
_________________
^Jamison. ^!!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
germ-x
Joined: 06 Apr 2009
Posts: 7165
|
| Posted: Thu May 24, 2012 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| AnAngryAmerican wrote: | | What I have a problem with is Elway taking someone - anyone - with a premium pick, which a second rounder no doubt is, who cannot help us win a Super Bowl now or in the very, very near future. You take your developmental players later on; i.e. Malik Jackson in the 5th as a potential future replacement for Robert Ayers. You just don't spend a second rounder on someone who won't see the field for several seasons, sheesh even Matt Millen had to be rolling his eyes at that decision. |
That is just a difference in philosophy and that is no reason to condemn a pick. Many of the most successful teams in this league and Super Bowl winning teams over the years have drafted developmental players with 1st and 2nd round picks. Just because it isn't what "you" would have done, doesn't mean it is wrong.
Hell the Giants, Patriots, Packers, and Steelers just off the top of my head have made developmental picks in the first 2 rounds over the last 3 or 4 years.
| AnAngryAmerican wrote: | I don't disagree with any of that. And, more than just watch interviews and highlight clips online, I was at Dove Valley on Monday and watched him play in person. He's a great guy and as I have said time and time and time again he's got loads of potential. However, are we trying to win a Super Bowl or just post a winning record? If we're trying to win a Super Bowl then there were other moves we could have made rather than drafting a QB who will barely get to practice, let alone start, for the next 3-5 years.
I have no problem with Osweiler himself, as a person or as a prospect. If Tebow were still our QB I'd be Osweiler's biggest champion right now. But, after signing Peyton, our window is short and we would have been better off taking a player who could HELP US WIN A SUPER BOWL in this short window, rather than worry about what's going to transpire at the QB position 3-5 years down the road. |
I am at least glad that you can see how much potential Osweiler has. He has loads of physical talent, some of it needs refinement, but more than anything it is about developing the mental portion of the game. We will have to wait and see how that goes.
As thebestever6 posted, if you want Super Bowls you should be more upset that Denver didn't re-sign a proven player like Brodrick Bunkley, or added more proven players in FA. You don't bank winning SB's on rookies. I would have loved to have had a guy like Casey Heyward at #57, i think he turns into one hell of a nickel CB, but more than likely a guy like Drayton Florence is a better nickel through the next couple of years. Brandon Thompson is another player i would have loved to have had. I think he was as safe a pick as you could find in this draft, but early on an older more experienced player like Justin Bannan will be as good of or an even better option.
| AnAngryAmerican wrote: | I don't care what Osweiler develops into four or five years from now. I'm interested in the Broncos contending for the Super Bowl this year, next year and the year after with Peyton Manning. Right now, I don't care if we can compete for a Super Bowl in 2018.
What if in 1995 Mike Shanahan had taken the advice that you (and most around here) suggest and rather than try to win a Super Bowl with John Elway, Steve Atwater, Shannon Sharpe, Alfred Williams and Gary Zimmerman in the next few years, he worried about what would happen in 2001? I sure would have missed going those two parades.... |
None of this even makes sense. Of the 19 draft picks Denver made in the 2 years leading up to the Super Bowl ('95 & '96 drafts) the only truly impactful players selected were Terrell Davis and John Mobley. I think the team would still have been Super Bowl caliber if they would have traded up 3 picks and drafted QB Tony Banks out of Michigan State instead of drafting Torey Smith at #44 who was basically just as useless in the 2 Super Bowl wins. There are about 17 other examples i could use in those 2 years as well.
Also if you look back since 1995 at how many years Denver has been in position to draft a quality QB prospect you will find that it is few and far between. John Elway's job isn't built around a 3 year plan because of Peyton Manning, it is about sustaining the franchise as successful over a LONG period of time. Having a top QB does that and Elway saw that QB in Osweiler. IMO, he knew full well that it could be many years before an opportunity like that came around again.
Will it work out? I have no idea. As i have said many times, no one here has the slightest clue how Brock Osweiler develops. However, i do like the philosophy behind it. As i have stated many times, IMO, the #57 pick in the 2012 draft isn't going to be the reason why the Denver Broncos are either good, bad, Super Bowl winning, or Losing. However, Brock Osweiler could be the biggest reason the Denver Broncos are competing for championships for the next decade+. I like my chances of winning a Super Bowl in that span, as opposed to a 3 year one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AKRNA
Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 4434
|
| Posted: Thu May 24, 2012 8:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| germ-x wrote: | | As i have stated many times, IMO, the #57 pick in the 2012 draft isn't going to be the reason why the Denver Broncos are either good, bad, Super Bowl winning, or Losing. However, Brock Osweiler could be the biggest reason the Denver Broncos are competing for championships for the next decade+. |
And that is the crux of the arguement. It's incredibly unlikely that we could've drafted a player at #57 that would mean the difference of even one game over the next few years, let alone a championship.
If Osweiler develops into the QB our FO thinks he can be, he'll be the greatest draft steal in Bronco's history.
Only time will tell.
Kinda off topic, but I wonder if PM might be a little more inclined to allow Brock some snaps as a closer if a game gets out of reach. It's just possible that he may finally relish the chance to limit his exposure on the field. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dbronx42
Joined: 19 Apr 2010
Posts: 3862
Location: Mile High 303
|
| Posted: Thu May 24, 2012 10:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| germ-x wrote: | | As i have stated many times, IMO, the #57 pick in the 2012 draft isn't going to be the reason why the Denver Broncos are either good, bad, Super Bowl winning, or Losing. However, Brock Osweiler could be the biggest reason the Denver Broncos are competing for championships for the next decade+. |
Some act like we took this guy with a 1st round pick. He was the 57th overall pick, and was one of the best prospects on the board at that point. We took a 21 year old QB with monster potential... It's not like we have a young Peyton Manning. He is 36 and coming off his 4th neck surgery.
Like you and others have said, nobody at the 57th pick was going to come in and be a major difference maker that would push our team to another level towards championship contention. There is absolutely nothing wrong with building towards the future with later draft picks. The elite teams have been doing that for YEARS.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AnAngryAmerican
Joined: 23 Apr 2006
Posts: 17521
Location: Loveland, CO
|
| Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 2:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| elliot878 wrote: | | All I was trying to do in here was temper the hate that so many are showing Osweiller. |
I can't speak for anyone else, but I don't have any "hate" towards Osweiler. I've said repeatedly he's got a lot of potential and I like him as a developmental QB prospect. I didn't think it was wise for a team with as many needs as we have to draft a player in the 2nd round who won't see the field for 3-5 years. But I don't think I've expressed any hate towards him as a player or as a person.
| elliot878 wrote: | | To get genuinely mad at a pick, lose sleep over it, and then take it out/dislike the player that became a Bronco instead of your guy though? Little unfair. Little more dramatic. |
Again I can't speak for anyone but myself and I'm not doing any of that.
| elliot878 wrote: | | The Packers took Rodgers with a first rounder while Brett Favre was still playing great football. They made that pick for the future. Now AAA I know you'll argue that Rodgers was a special player who could have (should have) gone number one overall. 20 something teams passed on Rodgers after the 9ers didn't take him. Is it because they had no use for a QB now or in the future? Probably not. Is it because they were drafting solely on position of need? Probably not. Do the 20 teams who passed on him regret passing on the value - most likely. |
The Rodgers analogy is so off base. If this year RGIII had fallen to #25 who wouldn't have taken him? That's the the more equal comparison. In 2005 the the teams between picks #2 and #24 who passed on Rodgers I'm sure now regret it, just like the teams between picks #1 and pick #198 in the 2000 draft probably regret not taking Tom Brady.
| germ-x wrote: | That is just a difference in philosophy and that is no reason to condemn a pick. Many of the most successful teams in this league and Super Bowl winning teams over the years have drafted developmental players with 1st and 2nd round picks. Just because it isn't what "you" would have done, doesn't mean it is wrong.
Hell the Giants, Patriots, Packers, and Steelers just off the top of my head have made developmental picks in the first 2 rounds over the last 3 or 4 years. |
That's also not a fair comparison. Just because we won our division and went the playoffs last year does not make us an elite team. We're still a team with a lot of holes. Let's be honest, we got lucky last year. Being slated in the bottom quarter of the draft is not an accurate reflection of our roster's overall talent (especially before free agency, in which we did well). The teams you mention, because they loaded their teams up in the early rounds during their building period, they were able to make some luxury picks (Rodgers being a foremost example) once they were contenders with few, if any, real pressing needs.
| germ-x wrote: | | As thebestever6 posted, if you want Super Bowls you should be more upset that Denver didn't re-sign a proven player like Brodrick Bunkley, or added more proven players in FA. |
I am upset we lost Bunkley. It was a mistake for Elway to not get him re-signed and I've said so repeatedly since the free agency period opened. But Elway's error in not re-signing Bunkley has nothing to do with the Osweiler pick. If anything, it's another point in the argument against taking Osweiler - had we re-signed Bunkley we would have had more talent on the roster to help us win, rather than going into the season lacking last year's best DT. If we re-signed Bunkley we would have had more leeway at #57 and spending it on a luxury pick like Osweiler wouldn't have been as bad.
| germ-x wrote: | | You don't bank winning SB's on rookies. I would have loved to have had a guy like Casey Heyward at #57, i think he turns into one hell of a nickel CB, but more than likely a guy like Drayton Florence is a better nickel through the next couple of years. Brandon Thompson is another player i would have loved to have had. I think he was as safe a pick as you could find in this draft, but early on an older more experienced player like Justin Bannan will be as good of or an even better option. |
| AKRNA wrote: | | And that is the crux of the arguement. It's incredibly unlikely that we could've drafted a player at #57 that would mean the difference of even one game over the next few years, let alone a championship. |
| dbronx42 wrote: | | Like you and others have said, nobody at the 57th pick was going to come in and be a major difference maker that would push our team to another level towards championship contention. There is absolutely nothing wrong with building towards the future with later draft picks. The elite teams have been doing that for YEARS. |
Depth players and rotational players are important. Niche players are important. I'm not assuming we were going to get a player at #57 who would have a Von Miller-like impact his rookie year. But ask yourself what the Broncos need more - a rotational CB (Hayward, Johnson, Robinson), DE (Curry), DT (Thompson) or WR (Randle) or a QB who won't play at all for three or four years? Even if Brock Osweiler is the best clipboard holder the NFL has ever seen, he will do less for us during the next few years as we try to win a Super Bowl than even a backup/role-player who sees 20 plays a week would.
_________________
big_palooka:
Broncos CSU Rams Rockies Tiger Woods |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lomaxgr
Joined: 30 Dec 2006
Posts: 19848
Location: Manchester, England
|
| Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 4:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| AKRNA wrote: | | Kinda off topic, but I wonder if PM might be a little more inclined to allow Brock some snaps as a closer if a game gets out of reach. It's just possible that he may finally relish the chance to limit his exposure on the field. |
No chance my friend. The guy is a perfectionist; he won't leave that field unless he is dragged off kicking and screaming.
_________________
20 TIMES, 20 TIMES MAN UNITTTTTEEDDD
From the banks of the River Irwell, to the shores of Sicily |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AntiSuperstar
Joined: 07 Oct 2007
Posts: 4341
|
| Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 6:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Army wrote: | | or, get this, play on Special Teams. |
Playing Tebow on Special Teams remains a worthwhile experiment. Supposedly the Jets are going to be utilizing Tebow in those roles.
_________________
Stop slobbering over Brian Dawkins |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lomaxgr
Joined: 30 Dec 2006
Posts: 19848
Location: Manchester, England
|
| Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 7:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| AntiSuperstar wrote: | | Army wrote: | | or, get this, play on Special Teams. |
Playing Tebow on Special Teams remains a worthwhile experiment. Supposedly the Jets are going to be utilizing Tebow in those roles. |
I agree, but there is no way Denver could have done that with the influence of his fanbase.
Personally, I don't think his impact on ST is worth the circus you have to put up with him around, but that is just me.
_________________
20 TIMES, 20 TIMES MAN UNITTTTTEEDDD
From the banks of the River Irwell, to the shores of Sicily |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AntiSuperstar
Joined: 07 Oct 2007
Posts: 4341
|
| Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 7:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Well obviously the Jets are hoping for Tebow to do more, probably the main reason they wanted him is to cure their pathetic red zone offense. But in any case, I would never seek out Tebow to have on my team but if for whatever reason he was I would try to see what he could do in Special Teams roles because I think he might have a good skillset there.
_________________
Stop slobbering over Brian Dawkins |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JerseysFinest27
Joined: 07 Jan 2010
Posts: 6107
Location: New Jersey... Props to inDENguise on the sig
|
| Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 8:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| germ-x wrote: | | As i have stated many times, IMO, the #57 pick in the 2012 draft isn't going to be the reason why the Denver Broncos are either good, bad, Super Bowl winning, or Losing. |
Not exactly. This could be debated...
What would you say about a guy like Mario Manningham? He went in the 3rd round, a full round after Brock did in 2008. Now if the Giants didnt take him in the draft that year, couldnt it be debated that they wouldnt have won the Super Bowl this year because of that magnificent catch down the sidelines, then the TD? In that exact same draft Ray Rice went #55, Terrel Thomas went #63, and Jamal Charles went #73, just to name a few...
Every pick matters. This is the reason Im on the side of not spending a high pick on a backup player, who likely wont see the field for at least 4 years. Without Manningham, IMO Giants down win Super Bowl.
_________________
Stop slobbering over Lance Ball. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Donut
Joined: 13 Jan 2008
Posts: 11530
|
| Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 3:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| lomaxgr wrote: | | AKRNA wrote: | | Kinda off topic, but I wonder if PM might be a little more inclined to allow Brock some snaps as a closer if a game gets out of reach. It's just possible that he may finally relish the chance to limit his exposure on the field. |
No chance my friend. The guy is a perfectionist; he won't leave that field unless he is dragged off kicking and screaming. |
This isn't the time to do so. You want him and WRs to play as much together as possible. Only time I can really see Osweiler playing any significant time is if they dont play the last game or last half to win.
| elliot878 wrote: | | The Packers took Rodgers with a first rounder while Brett Favre was still playing great football. They made that pick for the future. |
He also followed up the yr w/ only 20 TDs and 29 INTs. Everyone was expecting him to retire. I'm assuming Peyton want to play longer and be here for more than 2 yrs.
| germ-x wrote: | | AnAngryAmerican wrote: | | What I have a problem with is Elway taking someone - anyone - with a premium pick, which a second rounder no doubt is, who cannot help us win a Super Bowl now or in the very, very near future. You take your developmental players later on; i.e. Malik Jackson in the 5th as a potential future replacement for Robert Ayers. You just don't spend a second rounder on someone who won't see the field for several seasons, sheesh even Matt Millen had to be rolling his eyes at that decision. |
That is just a difference in philosophy and that is no reason to condemn a pick. Many of the most successful teams in this league and Super Bowl winning teams over the years have drafted developmental players with 1st and 2nd round picks. Just because it isn't what "you" would have done, doesn't mean it is wrong.
Hell the Giants, Patriots, Packers, and Steelers just off the top of my head have made developmental picks in the first 2 rounds over the last 3 or 4 years. |
Off the top of my head on guys you could be talking about for NE would be Solder and/or Vollmer and drafting developmental OTs is different than QB. They both were raw but still contributed/started games.
And Jersey I was arguing your lack of a point of Mallett being a 3rd round prospect w/o character issues. He did dominate some teams in SEC but not Bama and LSU but he still was better prospect than the other non cocaine using QBs.
_________________
| dhunt2402 wrote: | | You're like the patron saint of roster bubble players |
Adopt a Patriot: Ras I Dowling |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AntiSuperstar
Joined: 07 Oct 2007
Posts: 4341
|
| Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 3:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| JerseysFinest27 wrote: | | Every pick matters. This is the reason Im on the side of not spending a high pick on a backup player, who likely wont see the field for at least 4 years. Without Manningham, IMO Giants down win Super Bowl. |
Mario Manningham was a backup player the year after he was drafted. He did nothing his rookie season. Ray Rice and Terrell Thomas were backups their first season too. Besides, we have no idea how Peyton Manning's health will hold up anyhow so the likelyhood of Osweiler seeing the field in four seasons is a bit difficult to judge.
_________________
Stop slobbering over Brian Dawkins |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
