Jump to content

Broncofan

Veteran Members
  • Content count

    12,482
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Broncofan last won the day on October 9 2018

Broncofan had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,606 All-Pro

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

2,695 profile views
  1. Report: Fangio “treats everyone like crap”

    Re: Scangarelli's scheme being a bad fit for Flacco - he's a stopgap player. The issue should be with Elway's desperation to win-now and appease a win-now fanbase (and again, if Elway is just a mirror to Ellis making this call, so be it). You aren't winning with a scheme made to bring out Joe Flacco's strengths. His statue-like ability, combined with slow processing speeds, are why he failed - along with our lack of talent at the skill positions and the OL, of course. He's not a NFL-level starter, and hasn't been for several years - ppl have been blinded to the name value over actual performance. And it showed up in spades this year. Fangio might fail, or he might succeed in 2020. But to point to Flacco's poor fit in Scangarelli's scheme isn't an argument that holds water IMO. The issue is our overall lack of talent. We should be simply rebuilding for 2020, or even 2021. The speed of our D rebuild, if anything, should be cause for optimism there. And Munchak should be able to get our OL to round into shape, especially if we given him T talent to work with (and yes, first and foremost at LT, but also bring in some interior OL help as well). How we address our O with QB, OL and additional skill position players to add to Sutton/Lindsay & maybe Fant (who is coming on more, still has a ways to go, but progress is encouraging to see), will tell the tale. Fangio & Scangarelli have earned the right to show us in 2020 whether they're the answer. The galling lack of talent on O gives a clear pass here. Next year, different story, but 2 years is the minimum pretty much every coaching staff deserves (some actually argue 3, and there's merit to it, save for the outright disaster hires, like VJ was).
  2. Report: Fangio “treats everyone like crap”

    To be fair, the one guy with the least to lose says otherwise. s=20
  3. Much like Jusczyk influences the output and ceiling of the SF run game, his loss really drops the output of our run game. Something for fantasy owners to consider.
  4. Week 11 GDT: Broncos @ Vikings

    Huge component to our Shanahan scheme for run game. Crusher. At least it’s not one with long term risk.
  5. Week 11 GDT: Broncos @ Vikings

    The other part is the mileage - Wolfe's been an absolute warrior, but he's also got the mileage that comes with it. Harris has been a 60-70% snap guy and wasn't a full-time player until last year. Sadly that stuff matters in predicting whether or not a 2nd contract is a good call, and why a 3rd contract for trench guys rarely works.
  6. If tua comes out for the draft

    Firstly, while I have no idea where he goes (but I'll take a guess lol), Tua's got zero choice here - he HAS to declare. There isn't an "IF", it's a "WHEN". There is no way he should return to 'Bama. Pretty clear Saban only wanted him on the field, and the 2 tightrope procedures are NOT the standard of care for grade 2 HAS's - they only get players on to the field sooner. It gets you on the field sooner - but if you let it heal without the procedure, players are back in 4-6 weeks and are fine long-term. The fact 'Bama did the tightrope on him 2x for an injury that doesn't require anything but 4-6 weeks left should be telling Tua & co. everything they need to know. Declare, get out to the NFL - where at least you get paid for the risk. I do hope he had a nice insurance policy, because that's the only way he'll recover the lost money from a top 3 pick to wherever he falls (I'm guessing mid-late 1st - because a team that can afford to let him heal, and get him right, and can afford the risk of a later 1st busting....will do it). There's no questioning his talent, but even before this injury, the one legit flag was his risk of injury. "He could get hurt" is a terrible argument for any random player - but Tua's history actually raised this as a legit flag as to why he might not go 1.1 even before this week(over a less toolsy Burrow), so now the flag is going to be gigantic after this unfortunate injury. It's an injury that doesn't have to come with a career-ending death sentence, but the risk is going to be there, and it won't be quantifiable by April IMO. That's going to cause a drop.
  7. SNF Week 11: Rams v. Bears

    Not much more needs to be said....
  8. Week 11 GDT: Broncos @ Vikings

    Always pay the younger guy. If he gets insane expensive, no thanks, but if it has to be between Wolfe & Harris, it's no question.
  9. Random Thoughts

    Su’a Cravens does not sound well. Hope he gets the help he needs because those are pretty ominous actions.
  10. Week 11 GDT: Broncos @ Vikings

    Anyways, I was at work, so I only caught part of the game, will watch the replay later, but all I can say is long-term, that was the best possible result. We showed the reason why we have long-term hope...but also showed why we need to explore building up our O long-term. That final 20 secs also showed why we'll need to get a better QB than the serviceable-but-capped journeyman Allen, and the WR corps when the Vikes decided to bracket Sutton and force us to beat them with another play. Upgrade the OL early in the draft, find a FA 2nd WR and draft a WR early (T Rd1, WR/ILB and more OL help Day 2), and we'll have something to work with. And yes, for god's sakes, sometime in December at the latest - get Lock in there. In theory it's yet another heartbreaking L, but at 3-7 we are better off with a top 5-6 pick - CIN/WAS are going to be top 2 for sure, anything after that is fair game (although I think MIA is in the top 3). A 4-5 pick at least gets us into Andrew Thomas sniffing range - but we'd have to lose out.....so games like today, where our best guys are our young guys, and we give it our all, but still lose, are best-case long-term. It's on to Buffalo....
  11. Week 11 GDT: Broncos @ Vikings

    You can always come back tomorrow, slower posting day lol.
  12. Broncos Forum Pick'em & Survivor Week 11

    PIT at CLE DAL at DET JAX at IND BUF at MIA DEN at MIN NO at TB NYJ at WAS ATL at CAR HOU at BAL ARI at SF (injuries ravage the O, and playing a 10 min OT on MNF has big effects on next week's play) CIN at OAK NE at PHI CHI at LAR KC at LAC
  13. Team Building the FUTURE is now!

    BPA is very unlikely to be those positions Rd1. At Rd2 the gap is going to be so small (unless someone drops insanely) that it’s not likely to be enough to justify it. Overall BPA principle works to ensure teams don’t pass on significantly better talent players. Like taking a 80 grade player instead of 90 due to need. But taking a 82 guy at WR/ILB over a 84 guy at RB/S? Absolutely justifiable. The difference in talent has to be significant. Arguing BPA means the talent difference is not just a guy at the top of the list but a guy who’s in a different tier of talent. Those are far easier arguments on Day 1. On Day 2 it’s usually the reverse - taking a mediocre top 50-75 guy Rd2 out of pure need. The other part about Day 2 drafting though is the talent pool at each spot. You can justify getting a 80 grade ILB/WR over a 83 grade RB Rd2 if in Rd3-4 you have a 75+ RB, and 50-60 grade players at WR/ILB by waiting. Positional depth really factors into Day 2 when the talent differences aren’t nearly as high. It’s why the idea of taking the top guy off your big board isn’t an absolute if the 3-4 guys at the top are so clustered the difference is negligible - or the top guy on the board is followed by a talent pool so deep at that position waiting 1-2 rounds gets you a talent that’s only marginally lower. It’s the sound argument to waiting on RB Rd3-4. And I say all of that as a huge BPA proponent. But BPA implies the difference matters. That isn’t always the case.
  14. Official 2020 WR Thread

    Jeudy, Ruggs, Lamb, Shenault, Rheagor....so many elite-ceiling talents in very different packages. And the 2nd tier isn't bad by any means. Guys like Higgins & Collin Johnson & the small school guys would be sniffing the top tier most years, but get relegated to outside the top 5 in a loaded class. 2014's class rightfully earns top nod, but this has to be the best top-end ceiling class since then.
  15. This isn't Drew Lock, who played in the same system for 4 years. This isn't Daniel Jones, who played in the same system for 4 years. I am also somewhat concerned by the late success - early success is the most reliable of NFL predictors, when combined with NFL-level skills. Burrow won't have that. But there's clear context here. Burrow's now in a pro-style O for the first year - and thriving. He's faced elite competition the last 2 years now - and this year, in the pro-style O, he's thriving. And unlike some teams, LSU is running the gauntlet of good competition. Which should become "great" if he keeps this up vs. Georgia & the BCS (LSU doesn't even need to win out, just keep showing this kind of placement/anticipation and pocket awareness, and man...). Burrow's rise is also mixed in with the fact that A.) the rest of the QB draft class except Tua has really struggled (Eason, Herbert) or likely to stay in school (Fromm) and B.) Tua comes with major injury risk Q's now with a 2nd straight tightrope procedure. Add in that the need for QB has suddenly gone way up with Cam's decline, and Mariota flaming out, it's easy to see why Burrow is getting so much love. Burrow's late rise will mean he won't be a consensus 1.1 pick. But if it's CIN or MIA on the clock, QB will be front and center. It's not crazy to say Burrow could pass Tua. Tua's skills are undeniable, but his health flag is now more than just projection - it's real. That matters a lot.
×