Denver Broncos Discussion

njx9 · 11-09-2006, 08:21 AM

slightlyaraiderfan · 11-09-2006, 03:49 PM

0 post.

(until now of course)

njx9 · 11-09-2006, 03:55 PM

i have a feeling this thread will get pruned eventually. most of our pages came from people arguing with me who don't post here anymore.

Namy · 11-09-2006, 06:02 PM

If Broncos lose to Raiders this week I'd jump off a cliff

well ok not really. Anyway, this week should be easy. Raiders have been looking awful, and I expect sacks, INTs, and fumbles for our D this game. I want a SHUTOUT and our offense to score 20+ pts.

njx9 · 11-09-2006, 07:05 PM

yeah, i'll be moderately bitter if we don't break their will by the end of the first half. there's just no excuse this week.

Chris · 11-09-2006, 09:43 PM

Well that's crazy. When's Scott going to ask us the no-brainer, "What's their biggest need?" question. . .

njx9 · 11-09-2006, 09:54 PM

i think we've been vocal enough he won't need to.

Chris · 11-11-2006, 07:42 PM

I made a mock and posted it on the Broncos site, but it went like this without the analysis, you'll see it there if you want. I'm the user "Dream"

1) Tim Crowder, LDE
2) Dwayne Bowe, WR
3) Marcus Harrison, LDT (Junior)
3B) Doug Free, OT
4) **Traded to Atlanta**
5) Abraham Wright, RDE
6) Josh Gattis, FS
7) Germaine Race, RB

njx9 · 11-11-2006, 09:48 PM

LDT? i may just be misinterpreting the acronym after completely losing saturday (bloody international travel), but i didn't realize left defensive tackle needed the specificity.

Chris · 11-12-2006, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by njx9

LDT? i may just be misinterpreting the acronym after completely losing saturday (bloody international travel), but i didn't realize left defensive tackle needed the specificity.

It doesn't have to be, but he plays left defensive tackle. Warren already is the three technique guy at RT, so I figured a guy next to him would be best. Doesn't matter though, there are some who play where he does who'd be good too, but maybe less effective.

Space Ghost · 11-12-2006, 04:54 PM

Wow, I hope Cutler gets in this game, Cutler is 2/8 1TD 2INT. If you guys hadn't traded for Javon Walker I think that Cutler would already be on the field because he is the only one making Plummer not look like a complete bum.

Do you guys think that Kubiak was the reason that Plummer was so good last year and he is so bad this year? Or is he just that bad of a quarterback?

Namy · 11-12-2006, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Space Ghost

Wow, I hope Cutler gets in this game, Cutler is 2/8 1TD 2INT. If you guys hadn't traded for Javon Walker I think that Cutler would already be on the field because he is the only one making Plummer not look like a complete bum.

Do you guys think that Kubiak was the reason that Plummer was so good last year and he is so bad this year? Or is he just that bad of a quarterback?

THis is pathetic. It is a rivalry game, but honestly we just look unprepared. The defense is being penetrated with screen passes and the offense is looking as bad as it was in the beginning of the season if not worse.

Namy · 11-12-2006, 07:38 PM

So Plummer threw 3 INTs (shoulda been 4). He did go on a nice run, but it shouldn't have taken him so long to get in rythem. Pathetic performance by the offense, and defense also showed some vulnerability in the first half (but I'll give the D a pass because the offense was goin 3&out and the defense had numerous hurting players either in the game or not).

njx9 · 11-12-2006, 09:01 PM

someone give me a synopsis here... being in australia, i got to see a great rugby match on sunday instead of what appears to be one of the most atrocious performances by any playoff team this late in the season.

was our running game really that disgustingly bad, or did we just stop trying?

was jake as awful as it sounds? 21/30 doesn't sound too bad, but it looks like the interceptions very nearly killed us.

what the &*#^$* are we doing giving up that many points to oakland?

maybe most importantly, how do we score almost at will against a better steelers defense and then eke out victory against oakland?

njx9 · 11-12-2006, 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris

Quote:

Originally Posted by njx9

LDT? i may just be misinterpreting the acronym after completely losing saturday (bloody international travel), but i didn't realize left defensive tackle needed the specificity.

It doesn't have to be, but he plays left defensive tackle. Warren already is the three technique guy at RT, so I figured a guy next to him would be best. Doesn't matter though, there are some who play where he does who'd be good too, but maybe less effective.

gotcha. i've never heard them mentioned as LDT or RDT, usually NT and UT, but whatever, the terminology isn't all that important to me.

i like the positions (WR seems to high to me, but i seem to be the only one who doesn't think we need another one, so i won't argue), and a S in the 6th seems more logical to me (in reality) than a S early (though i wish we could just get one who was a stud... ferguson still kills me at least twice a game).

Namy · 11-12-2006, 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by njx9

someone give me a synopsis here... being in australia, i got to see a great rugby match on sunday instead of what appears to be one of the most atrocious performances by any playoff team this late in the season.

was our running game really that disgustingly bad, or did we just stop trying?

was jake as awful as it sounds? 21/30 doesn't sound too bad, but it looks like the interceptions very nearly killed us.

what the &*#^$* are we doing giving up that many points to oakland?

maybe most importantly, how do we score almost at will against a better steelers defense and then eke out victory against oakland?

In the first qtr Plummer had two quick stupid INTs that led to the raiders going up 7-0. His other INT tho wasn't THAT bad as it was fourth down anyway and the guy intercepted beyond where we were and it woulda been turnover on downs. Still, Plummer's efficiency is very volatile at this point and it makes me uncomfortable. He did play much better in the second half and made some good short passes under pressure...

The running game was completely gone. I was thoroughly unimpressed. Last week was bad, this week was worse. TBell didn't play much (maybe the injury is bothering him?), and his replacement Nash was pretty much "unspectacular". Anyways, rivalry games should never be expected to be blowouts, but hey, whatevers, we got the WIN which is all that matters temporarily.

njx9 · 11-13-2006, 02:49 AM

what happened to mike? i completely missed him on the injury report if he was there

Chris · 11-13-2006, 02:19 PM

Meadows also got the start over Foster.

Shanahan said he was just tinkering around to see what we had, in regards to that and with the backs. He's said both Bell and Foster have done good stuff, but the others earned that right.

Looks like our whole 2003 class sucked.

1 20 George Foster T Georgia
2 19 Terry Pierce LB Kansas State
4 11 Quentin Griffin RB Oklahoma
4 17 Nicholas Eason DT Clemson
4 31 Bryant McNeal DE Clemson
5 22 Ben Claxton C Mississippi
5 23 Adrian Madise WR Texas Christian
6 21 Aaron Hunt DE Texas Tech
7 13 Clint Mitchell DE Florida
7 21 Ahmaad Galloway RB Alabama

Also, if he's not happy with Foster, Pears played like **** today, and Meadows wasn't even that great.

Tackle is now an early first-day need for us. . .

njx9 · 11-13-2006, 04:03 PM

*refrains from dogging shanahan about his draft record*

njx9 · 11-14-2006, 03:33 PM

Chris · 11-15-2006, 11:40 AM

Shanahan wanted to trade back into the first for Maroney

I guess NJX and myself were wrong.

They wanted the kid bad.

Can you imagine?

Of course no team would, I mean those picks are worth as half as much as they are since they were future. . . but wow.

WOW.[/url]

njx9 · 11-15-2006, 03:40 PM

i refuse to admit that anything printed in the rocky mountain news has any vague credibility.

on the other hand, at least it says nothing about us trying to take a TE in the first. and it doesn't look like any of the running backs we could get are worth a first for us (unless the skins are in position to get AD).

johbur · 11-15-2006, 04:33 PM

Any news on how Mike Bell is doing? It seemed like he had a great pre-season, but has tailed off.

Chris · 11-15-2006, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by njx9

i refuse to admit that anything printed in the rocky mountain news has any vague credibility.

on the other hand, at least it says nothing about us trying to take a TE in the first. and it doesn't look like any of the running backs we could get are worth a first for us (unless the skins are in position to get AD).

What?

No, Krieger talked to Shanahan and said he wanted to get Maroney last year. . . by using future picks.

I believe this 100%.

I also think that if Lynch comes out, we'll have a legit shot at him. We have a lot of picks and players to trade. . . so we'll see.

draftguru151 · 11-15-2006, 07:50 PM

Is Dumervil actually playing well or just geting worthless easy sacks?