Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Tebow to the Broncos and related discussion
Options
Comments
-
Just on the bit there where you say about what was written in advance.
Lets just for a minute talk about Mel Kiper for example. Kiper does nothing but talk and study the draft from mid-February. Now this guy got 10 picks right in the draft off of his last board which was done the day before the draft. So the so called ESPN draft expert got 10 picks right out of 32 in the first round. This has to lead you on to believe that none of them really have any information and its all idle speculation.
Even during the draft Gruden twice went against Kiper on his thoughts on picks. Tebow was one of them and Alualu was the other.
Kiper didn't have Alualu or Tebow in his top 32. He screamed when the Jags took Alualu at no.10 and tbh I was shocked myself. The Cowboys board though had Alualu at 22.
So now we have to ask ourselves which opinion you respect more, the Cowboys or Kiper? Well for me anyways I would go with the Cowboys, their early round picks over the last couple of years have been pretty impressive with the likes of Felix Jones, Michael Jenkins, Marcus Spears and DeMarcus Ware all very successful first round picks since 2005. Which leads me to believe that Kiper is just another armchair pundit who is getting well paid to give his opinion.
There were a lot of boards that had Thomas at 25 to the Ravens by the way.
What are you talking about? What has Mel Kiper got to do with my opinion? And the bit about respecting the Cowboys opinion? You said you saw Thomas on their list but couldnt see where thay had Bryant projected so neither of us are right or wrong but all we can do is base our own opinions and what we have read and witnessed with the facts presented which in this case was very little.
Look I have no idea why you went off on a random bit above I never mentioned Kiper in fact I dont read his stuff the chap is always wrong. And again.
Oh and Thomas was projected on many boards from 25 to top 5 in the second again what is your point?. The issue has now become if Denver were afraid Thomas would go earlier than Bryant and in this case I told you he wouldnt but Denver used their pick to secure Thomas leaving Bryant on tha board. The Cowboys in my opinion got who they wanted because of Denver taking Thomas.
Stop trying to bulk up your own opinion with nonsense facts about Mel Kiper. Look as I already stated I made my own opinion based on it. If you don't agree that is fair enough. Stop trying to make yourself look right all the time. In this case if it turns out Im wrong I will admit but right now there is no evidence to back up either of our opinions other than we got a sneak peak at the cowboys board showing Thomas at drop in the lower end of the first. Who knows where they had Bryant. My opinion he was top 10 on their board. End off really.0 -
You said that what you read made you believe that Bryant was high on the Cowboys list.tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »What are you talking about? What has Mel Kiper got to do with my opinion? And the bit about respecting the Cowboys opinion? You said you saw Thomas on their list but couldnt see where thay had Bryant projected so neither of us are right or wrong but all we can do is base our own opinions and what we have read and witnessed with the facts presented which in this case was very little.
Look I have no idea why you went off on a random bit above I never mentioned Kiper in fact I dont read his stuff the chap is always wrong. And again.
Oh and Thomas was projected on many boards from 25 to top 5 in the second again what is your point?. The issue has now become if Denver were afraid Thomas would go earlier than Bryant and in this case I told you he wouldnt but Denver used their pick to secure Thomas leaving Bryant on tha board. The Cowboys in my opinion got who they wanted because of Denver taking Thomas.
Stop trying to bulk up your own opinion with nonsense facts about Mel Kiper. Look as I already stated I made my own opinion based on it. If you don't agree that is fair enough. Stop trying to make yourself look right all the time. In this case if it turns out Im wrong I will admit but right now there is no evidence to back up either of our opinions other than we got a sneak peak at the cowboys board showing Thomas at drop in the lower end of the first. Who knows where they had Bryant. My opinion he was top 10 on their board. End off really.
So thats from reading media and such.
I never said that you were listening to Kiper. What I said is lets take Kiper for example.
How you can make that out that I'm saying that Kiper is where you are getting your opinion from is beyond me.
I said that we really don't have a clue as to where Bryant or Tebow for that matter were on the Cowboys board. You agree with that.
What is this 'I'm trying to make myself look right all the time'?
We are having a discussion, I am telling you how I see things. I respect Josh McDaniels enough to believe that when he moved up for Thomas and Tebow that he was under the impression and likely right on the money with his thinking that he wouldn't get either player if he did not move up for them when he did.0 -
You said that what you read made you believe that Bryant was high on the Cowboys list.
So thats from reading media and such.
I never said that you were listening to Kiper. What I said is lets take Kiper for example.
How you can make that out that I'm saying that Kiper is where you are getting your opinion from is beyond me.
So picking one of the worst analysts out there seemed like a good idea at the time to use as an example. That guy is nearly always wrong.I said that we really don't have a clue as to where Bryant or Tebow for that matter were on the Cowboys board. You agree with that.
What is this 'I'm trying to make myself look right all the time'?
As to this why bother responding to me again mentioning Kiper if we are both in agreement none of us really know. In fact I said that a couple of times in post.
Because it seems you always have to respond to clarify your standing on it and you always add more and more substance to each response i.e Mel Kiper bit. The way I look it we both have our opinion on the issue and neither are going to change so why drag out this anymore than needs to be at this point.0 -
Are we to take it now that you are agreeing with Peter King that McDaniels will be with the Broncos in 3 years, I thought you were saying he would be gone after this season.
I'm thinking you read and take SI.com as almost gospel from reading a lot of your posts?
The sections I quoted showed the evidence that the Broncos overpaid for Tebow as well as one of the NFLs most respected analysts saying thatMcDaniels is risking everything for taking Tebow, how does that differ from what I have said?
He offered a balanced viewpoint that gives everyone in this debate something to quote and agree with. That's what I would call good writing and I thought it would add depth to the debate. I havent changed my view on this draft pick and to be honest I've been more than capable of forming my own opinion on these boards for a few years now. I'm insulted that you'd say this to be honest so I'm quite curious as to what other posts you are talking about?While King talks about draft points value there, the fact is that the Broncos were one of four teams that had 5 picks in the first 100, the Patriots, Broncos, Chiefs and Browns and they all got great value out of their original picks. There is a trend there if you can spot it too.
All of them had ex-Belichick era Patriots in their draft war rooms. McDaniels at the Broncos, Mangini at the Browns and Pioli at the Chiefs
I don't unerstand why you would bring up the drafting abilities of past Patriots. Have they covered themselves in glory away from New England?
When he took the the Chiefs job everyone said how great Pioli was in the draft and at personnel decisions, do you believe that he has made good drafts with the Chiefs the last two years? That the decision to give Matt Cassel a massive contract, before he took a snap, was a good decision?
I've already said my piece on the Broncos front office, I've been impressed by the Browns this off season but I'm putting most of that on decisions made by Mike Holgrem, Mancini has been somewhat decent in past drafts but I'm not going to give him the credit for this draft.0 -
I'll tell you what, why don't you put me on ignore and I'll do likewise. It just seems you want to keep dragging things out.tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »So picking one of the worst analysts out there seemed like a good idea at the time to use as an example. That guy is nearly always wrong.
As to this why bother responding to me again mentioning Kiper if we are both in agreement none of us really know. In fact I said that a couple of times in post.
Because it seems you always have to respond to clarify your standing on it and you always add more and more substance to each response i.e Mel Kiper bit. The way I look it we both have our opinion on the issue and neither are going to change so why drag out this anymore than needs to be at this point.0 -
Advertisement
-
You are going by a draft points system that some use and others don't. At the end of the draft the Broncos made 5 picks in the first 100. McDaniels did a lot of dealing to make that happen.frostie500 wrote: »The sections I quoted showed the evidence that the Broncos overpaid for Tebow as well as one of the NFLs most respected analysts saying thatMcDaniels is risking everything for taking Tebow, how does that differ from what I have said?
Personally I'm not really a fan of Peter King. He is ok by times but he completely loses the plot sometimes.frostie500 wrote: »He offered a balanced viewpoint that gives everyone in this debate something to quote and agree with. That's what I would call good writing and I thought it would add depth to the debate. I havent changed my view on this draft pick and to be honest I've been more than capable of forming my own opinion on these boards for a few years now. I'm insulted that you'd say this to be honest so I'm quite curious as to what other posts you are talking about?
I wasn't trying to insult you with that comment, I've noticed you mentioning SI.com a couple of times.
Its too early to tell, I'm just pointing out the wheeling and dealing aspect.frostie500 wrote: »I don't unerstand why you would bring up the drafting abilities of past Patriots. Have they covered themselves in glory away from New England?
As before, its just too early to tell.frostie500 wrote: »When he took the the Chiefs job everyone said how great Pioli was in the draft and at personnel decisions, do you believe that he has made good drafts with the Chiefs the last two years? That the decision to give Matt Cassel a massive contract, before he took a snap, was a good decision?
I despise Mangini, Holmgren is a guy I've always liked. I'd agree that Holmgren was behind the picks, I was pointing out the wheeling and dealing of the former Patriots just like BB does every draft and Mangini did this last year too.frostie500 wrote: »I've already said my piece on the Broncos front office, I've been impressed by the Browns this off season but I'm putting most of that on decisions made by Mike Holgrem, Mancini has been somewhat decent in past drafts but I'm not going to give him the credit for this draft.0 -
I'll tell you what, why don't you put me on ignore and I'll do likewise. It just seems you want to keep dragging things out.
Wow talk about being childish Eagle Eye. As for dragging things out I laugh at that. :rolleyes:
Wouldn't be the first time you used the ignore button when you don't agree with someone now would it. :rolleyes:0 -
Peter King:First, Denver trading the 40th, 70th and 114th picks in a power draft to pick Tebow is a powerful statement. Check out the draft trade chart that every team uses and you'll see how much Denver wanted to make sure it wasn't leapfrogged in the Tebow derby. The 25th pick is worth 720 points on the chart every team in the league uses -- some more religiously than others. The 43rd pick is worth 470, the 70th worth 240, and the 114th worth 66. That totals 776. The Broncos paid 56 more points than were necessary by the chart -- equivalent to the 199th overall pick, a late fourth-rounder -- to get Tebow. Denver, obviously, wanted to make the deal badly enough to ratchet up the compensation.
This is another reason why Peter King has gone down a lot in my respect in recent years. This analysis of the trade value is extremely flawed.
Reasons why:
- If you are going to trade up in the draft, you are expected to pay a more than fair value
- Even if the Ravens and Broncos wanted to trade at fair value its highly unlikely they have the selection of picks that match the value points exactly, so somebody always gets 'less' value
- Not every time uses the exact same draft trade values in the link above (its not an offical NFL doc), teams have their own values assigned to picks
0 -
I could report that post but I'll just ask, whats with all the not so sly digs?tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »Wow talk about being childish Eagle Eye. As for dragging things out I laugh at that. :rolleyes:
Wouldn't be the first time you used the ignore button when you don't agree with someone now would it. :rolleyes:0 -
I could report that post but I'll just ask, whats with all the not so sly digs?
Report the post then if you feel so strongly about. You said you were going to ignore me. I fail to see how I was talking a sly dig at you. From experience you publicly acknowledged you ignored Frisbee at one point for not agreeing with his posts. And now you said you were going to ignore me because of our little disagreement.
It seems you are taking this all too personally. I apologise if that is the case. It wouldn't be the first time we butt heads but I thought both of us would move on from it like all of us on here usually do.0 -
Advertisement
-
You are going by a draft points system that some use and others don't. At the end of the draft the Broncos made 5 picks in the first 100. McDaniels did a lot of dealing to make that happen.
Personally I'm not really a fan of Peter King. He is ok by times but he completely loses the plot sometimes.
I wasn't trying to insult you with that comment, I've noticed you mentioning SI.com a couple of times.
It seems to me that most teams use a basic variant of the same system, the values may be slightly higher or lower but in any likelihood they would be drastically different
As far as quoting SI I'll take your word it wasnt meant to be insulting but to clarify my use of their writers I think I've used it in this thread to rebuke posts and to echo my own thoughts.
In other words I've used them to assist in my argument, not to form it0 -
I don't especially care for Peter King (the Ochocinco hatred and coffee thing gets old Peter) but the Tebow points is very interesting and values him at over the 25 pick. Him going 1 is crazy. The two number 1s McDaniels used were on projects lets be honest. Okay maybe they will suprise us but the consensus is they need work and are second round picks. McDaniels didn't take over the Detroit Lions or the St Louis Rams which required rebuilding in every sense, he took over a near playoff team with young players (if it was older players like the Seahawks I'd understand more). He has bulldozed everything good about them and essentially is starting again. He is already 2 drafts in and has gone really far backwards. Maybe they will be better then what he had, but he will struggle to be around if they come to fruition.0
-
I don't especially care for Peter King (the Ochocinco hatred and coffee thing gets old Peter) but the Tebow points is very interesting and values him at over the 25 pick. Him going 1 is crazy. The two number 1s McDaniels used were on projects lets be honest. Okay maybe they will suprise us but the consensus is they need work and are second round picks. McDaniels didn't take over the Detroit Lions or the St Louis Rams which required rebuilding in every sense, he took over a near playoff team with young players (if it was older players like the Seahawks I'd understand more). He has bulldozed everything good about them and essentially is starting again. He is already 2 drafts in and has gone really far backwards. Maybe they will be better then what he had, but he will struggle to be around if they come to fruition.
Were the Broncos really all that good before McDaniels got his hands on them and destroyed them?
I remember the Pats trouncing them that season by 30 or so points. They also fired their coach too. Then McDaniels came in and his two best players throwing hissy fits and left, they were hardly a "near" playoff team after all that.
I think you may be overhyping how good, Shanahan, Culter, Marshall and company were...they were pretty average, 8-8 in 08, 7-9 in 07, 9-7 in 06, then in comes McDaniels gets rid of Culter, and the team plumments from the standard of the year before all the way down to 8-8.0 -
Were the Broncos really all that good before McDaniels got his hands on them and destroyed them?
I remember the Pats trouncing them that season by 30 or so points. They also fired their coach too. Then McDaniels came in and his two best players throwing hissy fits and left, they were hardly a "near" playoff team after all that.
I think you may be overhyping how good, Shanahan, Culter, Marshall and company were...they were pretty average, 8-8 in 08, 7-9 in 07, 9-7 in 06, then in comes McDaniels gets rid of Culter, and the team plumments from the standard of the year before all the way down to 8-8.
They were 8-4 going into the last 4 games. They lost their lost 4 games, a spectacular fail, cost Shanahan his job. But the offense was productive, in fact one of the best in the NFL at that stage. The offensive line was brilliant (and still is, one of the things he hasn't dismantled). On offense, they were unlucky with numerous running backs getting injured and that crippled the offense a bit by year end. Having Cutlers, Sheffler, Royal and Marshell made their passing game potent up until then.
Their problem in the main was defense. Shanahan messed up badly with personnell and coaches to lead that unit.
If the Broncos could have get Shanahan the offensive coach, got a GM who had powers above him I think they would have done that, but of course nothing works that way.
The team was one on the up. Most said so.
He has kept the line and improved the RBs in fairness, but will that be still good by the time Tebow/Thomas are ready?
As regards hissy fits. Marshell was always going to throw one, he wanted to be paid and to be frank deserved it, his actions were dumb but he wasn't the first to do such a thing. With Cutler, he implied he wanted to trade him! What did he expect in fairness.0 -
Really cool idea for a this thread which is getting tedious,why dont we all wait 3 years and see how things work out.That way you guys dont have 3 seasons of i know more than you bull****.:D
This is rapidly turning into a liverpool/unitedesque thread.0 -
Thats right folks, Tebow's Bronco's rookie jersey is the fastest selling rookie jersey of all time. That guy is just money.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_corner/post/Tim-Tebow-is-already-setting-records?urn=nfl,2371050 -
Thats right folks, Tebow's Bronco's rookie jersey is the fastest selling rookie jersey of all time. That guy is just money.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_corner/post/Tim-Tebow-is-already-setting-records?urn=nfl,237105
Quick give the man a trophy or ring in celebration of his new record.
0 -
Slighly dark humour here but I did mention that the Broncos O line was brilliant, well...Ryan Clady, tackle for the Broncos tore his patellar tendon playing basketball and is expecting to be missing for a while.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d817d85fa&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true0 -
Rumour is it's 3 months but I'd say it will be longer, it's a massive blow for Denver and McDaniels if he missed a good bit of the season. He's already half way up the creek with only one paddle and this could finish him off. As a Raider fan I'm delighted with everyhing he's done so far in his tenure, I hope he sticks around for awhile. Personnally I think we're now ahead of the Broncos.0
-
Chucky the tree wrote: »Rumour is it's 3 months but I'd say it will be longer, it's a massive blow for Denver and McDaniels if he missed a good bit of the season. He's already half way up the creek with only one paddle and this could finish him off. As a Raider fan I'm delighted with everyhing he's done so far in his tenure, I hope he sticks around for awhile. Personnally I think we're now ahead of the Broncos.
What are your expectations for the Raiders for 2010? I watched a few of their games last year and they seemed to be playing hard and slowely improving. If some of their draft picks pan out and Campell improves the QB play you could be looking at 2nd in the division I'd say.0 -
Advertisement
-
What are your expectations for the Raiders for 2010? I watched a few of their games last year and they seemed to be playing hard and slowely improving. If some of their draft picks pan out and Campell improves the QB play you could be looking at 2nd in the division I'd say.
I'd definitely hope for 8-8 and I'd be disappointed if we get at least 7 wins. We got 5 wins with last year with a QB combination of JR and Gradkowski so Campbell should be a big improvement. I think he's really underrated. Last year he played on a horrible Redskins offense had still had a rating of 86 and 20TD's. Our O-line should improve from last year, if we can keep Gallery fit for the year it will be a huge help, a very underrated LG. With Kalif Barnes getting a full training camp in a RT I'm hoping he can push on a keep his place. With the potential of Bruce Campbell and Veldheer the depth at our tackle positions isn't too bad. Louis Murphy showed last year he has a great potential at WR and in Zach Miller we have one of the best young TE's in the league and he'll be a great weapon for Campbell. On defensive the big issue is our run D, I'm not 100% convinced it's fixed but we should see our play getting better with McClain at MLB and Seymour and Tommy Kelly as our DT.
Chargers should still walk the division but I honestly wouldn't be massively shocked if we snuck into the play-offs. Especially when all the other divisions are so tight that I think 9-7 will be enough for a play off spot.0 -
Campbell has a lot of problems with his game. I watched a lot of him over the past two years. He cannot throw the ball on the run, he is slow to read the field and find an open reciever and he is not accurate on deep balls. I said last year that what amazed me was the difference in his performance when in no huddle offense which happened regularly with the Redskins last season. He looked really good in no huddle.
What he needs is a lot of time in the pocket, if the Raiders OL can give him that he will be successful.0
Advertisement