Starlord Posted March 19 Report Share Posted March 19 New league year began March 17th. Less than impressed with the way the Bengals spent the 5th most cap money so far. A bunch of average guys basically. One impressive signing - CB Mike Hinton is a steal and he was pulled away from the Steelers. We did manage to get an ok OT with Riley Reiff. Although, he is better than the 'matadors' we have on the line right now. We FINALLY got rid of the worst OT in the league - Bobby Hart - so addition by substraction I always say! Weirdly, we also got rid of the worst QB in the league, Ryan Finley. Better yet, we somehow got the Texans to trade for him. This could be proof that the Texans are now the worst run team in the league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
death tribble Posted March 19 Report Share Posted March 19 In spite of any evidence to the contrary I have said it before and I will say it again. Or words to that effect if we get pedantic. The Vikings will win it all this time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pariah Posted March 20 Report Share Posted March 20 I have mixed feelings about what the Broncos are doing so far this year. I very much like the fact that there is someone other than John Elway in charge of personnel decisions. I'm not sure exactly what George Paton is trying to do, though. Bringing back Justin Simmons was a no-brainer, even at the price they paid. Bringing back Von Miller and Shelby Harris probably helps too. I'm not thrilled with the decision to release Phillip Lindsay, who just signed a one-year deal with the Texans. I'm also not certain why Paton felt the need to replace Phillip Lindsay with a backup running back from his old team, the Vikings. I don't see that as a substantial upgrade. But what really perplexes me is the apparent lack of urgency to solve the quarterback situation. Reports have had the Broncos involved in pretty much every free agent quarterback conversation this offseason...and have resulted in no changes. There are still rumors that the Broncos are in the hunt for Deshaun Watson. I don't know if this is real, but if it is, I'm not thrilled with it for two reasons: 1) The number of draft picks and or players the Broncos will have to give up is going to be way too high; and 2) The large number of impending lawsuits is problematic, to say the least. I'd love it if Denver could get a reliable backup/mentor to help Drew Lock figure out his footwork, but I don't know that there are any left at this point. And the Broncos need too much help in other areas to use a top-10 pick on a quarterback. I don't think we'll have a great idea of where the Broncos stand until after the draft, of course, but it looks like another year without playoffs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archer Posted March 21 Report Share Posted March 21 6 hours ago, Pariah said: I have mixed feelings about what the Broncos are doing so far this year. I very much like the fact that there is someone other than John Elway in charge of personnel decisions. I'm not sure exactly what George Paton is trying to do, though. Bringing back Justin Simmons was a no-brainer, even at the price they paid. Bringing back Von Miller and Shelby Harris probably helps too. I'm not thrilled with the decision to release Phillip Lindsay, who just signed a one-year deal with the Texans. I'm also not certain why Paton felt the need to replace Phillip Lindsay with a backup running back from his old team, the Vikings. I don't see that as a substantial upgrade. But what really perplexes me is the apparent lack of urgency to solve the quarterback situation. Reports have had the Broncos involved in pretty much every free agent quarterback conversation this offseason...and have resulted in no changes. There are still rumors that the Broncos are in the hunt for Deshaun Watson. I don't know if this is real, but if it is, I'm not thrilled with it for two reasons: 1) The number of draft picks and or players the Broncos will have to give up is going to be way too high; and 2) The large number of impending lawsuits is problematic, to say the least. I'd love it if Denver could get a reliable backup/mentor to help Drew Lock figure out his footwork, but I don't know that there are any left at this point. And the Broncos need too much help in other areas to use a top-10 pick on a quarterback. I don't think we'll have a great idea of where the Broncos stand until after the draft, of course, but it looks like another year without playoffs. They spent the bank on solidifying their secondary with Simmons/Fuller. I'm sure they'll find a few pennies in the seat cushions to pay for a quarterback. Dallas started a rookie QB 7th round draft pick this last season. Hey, Denver has three shots at getting a 7th round QB, so what's the worry? Round 1: No. 9 overall Round 2: No. 40 Round 3: No. 71 Round 4: No. 114 Round 5: No. 152 Round 6: No. 191 Round 7: Nos. 237, 239 (from Giants), 253 (from Browns) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pariah Posted March 21 Report Share Posted March 21 Funny thing is that Denver has done that twice in recent years (Trevor Siemian and Chad Kelly). Trevor ended up being a serviceable quarterback for a couple of years. Chad, not so much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grailknight Posted March 22 Report Share Posted March 22 Unless you are sure of your starter, you never have too many other needs to use a top ten pick on a quarterback. The right top ten quarterback is just that valuable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pariah Posted March 22 Report Share Posted March 22 In this year's draft, the top 5 quarterbacks in the draft might already be gone by the time that #9 pick comes around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grailknight Posted March 22 Report Share Posted March 22 In which case you address other needs. But if you believe in Wilson, Fields, Lance or Jones(Lawrence is the Chosen One) and one is available at #9 then you have to go for it. Only 12 of the 32 teams don't currently have a first round pick at QB, and only 4 teams made the playoffs last year without one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pariah Posted March 22 Report Share Posted March 22 Most draft projections I've seen show at least four of those five gone in the first 8 picks, generally starting with Lawrence followed by Wilson*. Lance or Jones might be there at #9, but I'm not convinced either is clearly a better option than Lock at this point. I'd rather see the Broncos take a stout defensive player, maybe a LB like Micah Parsons. -- *As much as i love BYU, I'm not quite sold on Zack Wilson as a top 5 pick. Yeah, he had a fantastic year...against largely inferior competition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unclevlad Posted March 22 Report Share Posted March 22 Besides, the push to get the QB when you lack the parts around him is still, IMO, foolish, even perhaps pandering to the fan base. Sure, you can't win consistently with a bad QB...but the bad team is gonna wreck the young QB too. And by the time you get the pieces around the QB...the rookie contract expires and now you're looking at being forced into $25M/year. Or more. And: --how many high-draft QBs fail to play up to their draft position, if not outright fail to produce? --while, sure, the probability that a high pick will pan out is higher than for a lower pick...Russell Wilson. That guy down in Tampa. Later first round includes Aaron Rodgers. I think the mantra in the NFL is a variation on the old aphorism "no one ever got fired for buying IBM" back in the day. Expensive, sure, but you're never gonna get blamed if things break. Whereas you do risk serious blame if you go a different direction and it doesn't work out. That's the MASSIVELY conservative mentality throughout most of the NFL: draft the QB when you have the shot at a good one because NOT doing so will get you reamed online and in the media. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pariah Posted March 22 Report Share Posted March 22 18 minutes ago, unclevlad said: --how many high-draft QBs fail to play up to their draft position, if not outright fail to produce? Hmm, let's look at the Broncos' recent quarterback draft history: 2019: Drew Lock (2nd round) 2017: Chad Kelly (7th; Mr. Irrelevant) 2016: Paxton Lynch (1st; 26th pick overall) 2015: Trevor Siemian (7th) 2013: Zac Dysert (7th) 2012: Brock Osweiler (2nd) 2010 Tim Tebow (1st; 25th pick overall) 2006 Jay Cutler (1st; 11th pic overall) ...and so on. Summary: In the past 15 years, the Broncos have taken quarterbacks in the 1st, 2nd, and 7th rounds exclusively. This is the Broncos' history of drafting quarterbacks in a nutshell. Of the three quarterbacks who took them to the Super Bowl, exactly none were drafted by Denver. Jay Cutler is arguably the best quarterback ever drafted by the organization, with Brian Griese and Gary Kubiak as honorable mentions. Needless to say, I have zero confidence in the organization's ability to address the quarterback position via the draft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cygnia Posted March 28 Report Share Posted March 28 The 10 Worst Bold Moves to Acquire A Quarterback Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archer Posted March 30 Report Share Posted March 30 On 3/28/2021 at 10:27 AM, Cygnia said: The 10 Worst Bold Moves to Acquire A Quarterback Trading far in advance of a draft in hopes that your player will still be on the board on draft day is the riskiest strategy IMO. You give up a ton, not only having no idea if the player will work out, but not even knowing if you'll even be able to draft the player to see if he will work out. I think most teams would be much better off drafting the best player on the board in that position rather than make risky trades hoping to hit gold in the draft. Most teams have more problems than just "we need a great QB" and trading away a bunch of valuable high-level draft picks stops you from stocking up your roster with players around whoever is your QB. A great QB is seldom a great QB without a good offensive line, a good running back, some receivers, and a good defense so that you don't have to score 35 points a game in order to have an outside chance of winning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starlord Posted March 30 Author Report Share Posted March 30 17 game season is official starting this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unclevlad Posted March 31 Report Share Posted March 31 One thing to remember: when you trade away the sun, moon, and stars to move up, it's 100% guaranteed those assets you trade away are gone. It's FAR from 100% that the very high draft pick will pan out. And yet again, the NFL shows it's driven by More Money, More Money, More Money. The season's final day is January 9th. UGH. Personally I can't think of a single bloody thing I like about this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unclevlad Posted April 5 Report Share Posted April 5 And so the Jets jettison Sam Darnold for next to nothing...a 6th round pick this year and 2nd and 4th next year. Darnold was the #3 pick in 2018; had they traded the pick at the time, they could've gotten MUCH more. It also strongly hints that they're going to repeat history by taking another QB with the 2nd pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starlord Posted April 5 Author Report Share Posted April 5 The odds for the Bengals to get the best non-QB player available just increased. Of course, they'll probably screw it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Man Posted April 5 Report Share Posted April 5 58 minutes ago, unclevlad said: And so the Jets jettison Sam Darnold for next to nothing...a 6th round pick this year and 2nd and 4th next year. Darnold was the #3 pick in 2018; had they traded the pick at the time, they could've gotten MUCH more. It also strongly hints that they're going to repeat history by taking another QB with the 2nd pick. At least Darnold gets a chance to turn things around in a less dysfunctional franchise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unclevlad Posted April 6 Report Share Posted April 6 Way back in the day, one of the more...colorful...gamers in the local circle, brought in a new character...Hero, probably 4th Ed. The GM's comment was "how can someone spend so much and get so little for it?" The Jets kinda remind me of that. No focus, no direction. Fire the GM AFTER letting him run the free agency signings and the draft? That's kinda hard to rationalize, and to me points a finger squarely at the owner. Not like they're unique there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pariah Posted April 9 Report Share Posted April 9 From our friends at The Onion: Panthers Adopt Patchy-Haired, Shivering Rescue QB Who Spent Years Abused By Jets Quote The sheer lack of positive experiences he’s had with football probably mean he’s scarred for life, but that doesn’t make him a bad quarterback. archer and Old Man 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unclevlad Posted April 9 Report Share Posted April 9 Maybe he was scarred for life, but you can get an AWFUL lot of therapy for $30M. EDIT: according to Sportrachttps://www.spotrac.com/nfl/carolina-panthers/sam-darnold-25098/#:~:text=Sam Darnold signed a 4,average annual salary of %247%2C561%2C929. one plausible reason the Jets bailed comes in 2022 when his cap hit *explodes*. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pariah Posted April 16 Report Share Posted April 16 CBS reported that the Washington Football Team has been reaching out to fans on options for a new team name. Here are the options: Aces Ambassadors Anchors Archers Armada Aviators Beacons Belters Brigade Commanders Defenders Demon Cats First City Football Club (FCFC) Griffins Guardians Icons Majors Monarchs Pilots Presidents Razorbacks Redtails Redwolves Red Hogs Renegades Riders Rising Royals Rubies Swifts Warriors Washington DC Football Club (DCFC) Washington Capital City Football Club (CCFC) Wayfarers Wild Hogs 32FC (W32) Football Team Honestly, I think the names "Monarchs" and "Royals" are in poor taste, but whatever. I do find FCFC, DCFC, and CCFC perversely entertaining. I have no idea what 32FC is all about. I think my Top Five would be Redtails, Defenders, Wild Hogs, Aces, and Aviators in no particular order. Old Man 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Man Posted April 16 Report Share Posted April 16 I still prefer Football Team. It’s ironic and hilarious. That team went from having the worst name to the best. I find most of the other suggestions in the list to be uninspired, though the Football Club ones are amusing. DC cries out for a team name like Revolutionaries or Privateers. I’d especially like them to be called the Conspirators, but that may be too accurate. Pariah 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pariah Posted April 16 Report Share Posted April 16 They could use "Bullets". Nobody's using that one anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archer Posted April 16 Report Share Posted April 16 24 minutes ago, Pariah said: They could use "Bullets". Nobody's using that one anymore. Though the name is no longer in use, I'm sure it's still under trademark by the original owners of the name. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.