What to do at QB?

[AnAngryAmerican]

23 hours ago, BroncoBruin said:

Acquiring Rodgers is by far the most realistic path to competing for championships (why we all watch) for the next decade. On the other hand, every single fanbase talks themselves into of a slow rebuilding process resulting in future SB runs. It's blind hope. Give me the scenario where I know the team has a shot over the mystery Door #2 scenario that involves finding the QB + getting everything right at the perfect time. They have that window right now with the young core they've assembled + strong veteran group on defense. All they need is the QB. I cannot understand for the life of me why anyone would think it's better to be patient, lose players like Von Miller and Kyle Fuller, lose the rookie contract value of guys like Chubb, Sutton and Fant, keep rolling the dice at QB and hope you sustain the same success they've had in the draft for another 4-5 year window. That's pretty absurd. 

This is an excellent post.

And I’ll only add that Paton, who I think is a solid GM, does not come from a franchise with a history of developing QBs. This is a guy who was on board (as far as we know) with drafting Christian Ponder and Teddy Bridgewater and signing the likes of Matt Cassell, Case Keenum, Sam Bradford and Kirk Cousins. A vanilla group of QBs if there ever was one. He was part of an org that built an incredible roster but never found the right QB to get over the hump. I don’t want that happening here.

If we can land Aaron with this current roster - one that has a great mix of young, cheap talent and experienced vets - we have a 3-4 year window with a serious chance to bring home this org’s fourth (and maybe fifth) Lombardi. 

[BroncoBruin]

32 minutes ago, AKRNA said:

Ya hit the nail on the head! On one side of the coin you have the QB centric philosophy, it takes a great QB to win a championship.IE The QB makes the team.

On the other it's a "defense wins championships, games are won or lost at the LOS" philosophy. IE' the team makes the QB. 

What's funny is the same teams are often used for both arguments.  Someone will mention Wilson, I'll mention both his SB appearances his D was ranked #1. Roethlisberger? His 3 appearances the D was #1 twice and 3rd once. Hasn't been back to the SB since LeBeau left. Rodgers? D was ranked 2nd when GB won the SB.

The Pats had one of the best D's in the league for decades, Ravens and Bucs both won SB's with Jman QB's and great D's.

Anyway, I think what we're seein from Paton is a philsophy thats not QB centric. Only time will tell if it's successful.

 

At least from my side of things, it's a good bit more nuanced than that. I'm not trying to add a QB to a barren roster and saying this is our ticket to a championship. This is a really talented roster that should be strong in most areas...and they have the opportunity to add one of the best QBs in football to it. It's a roster built for a quality QB to walk into and thrive, and the cost is largely future assets that don't cost you a chance to win in the next two years. That's actually the ideal situation short of having the guy who's immediately a star while still on a rookie deal. It's having your cake and eating it too basically. As far as the short window goes, it's not easy to maintain a window anyway and without a QB it's basically a moot point because your ceiling is limited to a short playoff run.

[BroncoBruin]

As for CWO saying I'm a "desperate fan" or whatever nonsense that was, that's fine. It's obviously wrong but we're entitled to our perspectives. 

It isn't desperation, it's actually very calculated. I've explained my reasons for why 2021 is really the perfect window to make this move. The 2018-2020 rookie class group are all cheap for the last time and half the defense is on an expiring deal. That sum total of players represents, what, more than half the core of this team? It's going to be very hard to offset those losses + financial loss of value from paying Chubb and Sutton and preparing to re-sign a couple of the 2019 picks. Now is the perfect time to strike. I'm not afraid to be aggressive when I see the perfect opportunity fall into place. And in those situations in life, I've never regretted taking the big swing, even if I had to overspend a bit. You play scared, you'll only hurt yourself and live with regrets. But those people also always chastise others for having the guts to take risks. Of course, in this case, somehow resting the hopes of this roster on the great Lock/Bridgewater camp competition isn't viewed as a risk. Not so sure I'd agree.

Edited May 17, 2021 by BroncoBruin

[BroncoBruin]

Also, the whole idea of "paying for someone else's success" is so silly and outdated. How many Super Bowls would the Broncos have won if they bought into this? Zero. Free agent moves put those teams over the top. 

You know who would have really benefitted from his team paying for someone else's successes? Aaron Rodgers. Green Bay is one of the better drafting teams in the league and hardly ever make free agent moves to fill holes. And they consistently put good, not great, rosters around Rodgers. 

There's a balance to it all. Anyone who thinks there's one sure philosophy to roster building is kidding themselves. I know "just hit on all your draft picks" sounds like a great plan, but it never plays out that way long term and consequently you'll need to find other ways of improving your roster.

Edited May 17, 2021 by BroncoBruin

[ClockWorkOrange]

18 minutes ago, BroncoBruin said:

As for CWO saying I'm a "desperate fan" or whatever nonsense that was, that's fine. It's obviously wrong but we're entitled to our perspectives. 

It isn't desperation, it's actually very calculated. I've explained my reasons for why 2021 is really the perfect window to make this move. The 2018-2020 rookie class group are all cheap for the last time and half the defense is on an expiring deal. That sum total of players represents, what, more than half the core of this team? It's going to be very hard to offset those losses + financial loss of value from paying Chubb and Sutton and preparing to re-sign a couple of the 2019 picks. Now is the perfect time to strike. I'm not afraid to be aggressive when I see the perfect opportunity fall into place. And in those situations in life, I've never regretted taking the big swing, even if I had to overspend a bit. You play scared, you'll only hurt yourself and live with regrets. But those people also always chastise others for having the guts to take risks. Of course, in this case, somehow resting the hopes of this roster on the great Lock/Bridgewater camp competition isn't viewed as a risk. Not so sure I'd agree.

It is a desperate plan to overpay for someone else's success instead of making your own.  I think it is bad economics and will not lead to long term success.  I think that it is true... Sorry if that offends you because you like this way of building a team... 

[BroncoBruin]

Just now, ClockWorkOrange said:

It is a desperate plan to overpay for someone else's success instead of making your own.  I think it is bad economics and will not lead to long term success.  I think that it is true... Sorry if that offends you because you like this way of building a team... 

You mean like the 1997 Broncos? Or the 1998 Broncos? Or the 2015 Broncos? It's a shame you're so inflexible in your philosophy, it's not a very enlightened way of thinking about roster building. 

 

[ClockWorkOrange]

7 minutes ago, BroncoBruin said:

Also, the whole idea of "paying for someone else's success" is so silly and outdated. How many Super Bowls would the Broncos have won if they bought into this? Zero. Free agent moves put those teams over the top. 

You know who would have really benefitted from his team paying for someone else's successes? Aaron Rodgers. Green Bay is one of the better drafting teams in the league and hardly ever make free agent moves to fill holes. And they consistently put good, not great, rosters around Rodgers. 

There's a balance to it all. Anyone who thinks there's one sure philosophy to roster building is kidding themselves. I know "just hit on all your draft picks" sounds like a great plan, but it never plays out that way long term and consequently you'll need to find other ways of improving your roster.

I do not think it is outdated at all.. I mean a team that built through the draft (4 great drafts) and created team depth before landing their QB just won the SB last year.  The processes for Tampa was clear... Build a great team and the QB will follow.  I have no problem with a proven Vet joining the team.  In fact, it is one of the best features of the build through the draft model... Proven Vets are attracted to deep teams and you do not need to trade three firsts and a player to get him...  Not antiquated at all unless you mean by a few months... 

[ClockWorkOrange]

1 minute ago, BroncoBruin said:

You mean like the 1997 Broncos? Or the 1998 Broncos? Or the 2015 Broncos? It's a shame you're so inflexible in your philosophy, it's not a very enlightened way of thinking about roster building. 

 

No... We did not trade away three firsts and a player to acquire players for any of those teams... What are you talking about.  The desperate part is the OVERPAY.  Sometimes if feels you are making stuff up to be right... Come on man.

 

[BroncoBruin]

Just now, ClockWorkOrange said:

I do not think it is outdated at all.. I mean a team that built through the draft (4 great drafts) and created team depth before landing their QB just won the SB last year.  The processes for Tampa was clear... Build a great team and the QB will follow.  I have no problem with a proven Vet joining the team.  In fact, it is one of the best features of the build through the draft model... Proven Vets are attracted to deep teams and you do not need to trade three firsts and a player to get him...  Not antiquated at all unless you mean by a few months... 

So it's okay for Tampa to chase championships because they didn't give up future assets who wouldn't have affected their pursuit of a title last year. Got it. Here's a dose of reality: if Brady retired this offseason, the first round picks they didn't need to give up wouldn't make a difference in the next few years. Because A) they'd be back in QB purgatory and B) the "window" for a great roster only lasts a few years (see: 2017 Eagles)

[BroncoBruin]

17 minutes ago, ClockWorkOrange said:

No... We did not trade away three firsts and a player to acquire players for any of those teams... What are you talking about.  The desperate part is the OVERPAY.  Sometimes if feels you are making stuff up to be right... Come on man.

 

Okay, fine. I misunderstood.  "Overpay for someone else's success" was exclusively tied to this situation and not a general thing encompassing free agency (which every Broncos SB winner has been built off of). But judging from your posts about this draft and develop philosophy you seem to view as infallible, you must have hated that 2014 offseason when they let every one of their drafted contributors walk in free agency so they could sign four hired guns developed on other teams. But it ended up being the reason we won a Super Bowl. 

Regardless, I find your method of argument and the victimization pretty obnoxious and we're not getting anywhere. Pretty clear that you don't actually listen to anyone in good faith, which is a shame. 

Edited May 17, 2021 by BroncoBruin

[BroncoBruin]

1 hour ago, AnAngryAmerican said:

This is an excellent post.

And I’ll only add that Paton, who I think is a solid GM, does not come from a franchise with a history of developing QBs. This is a guy who was on board (as far as we know) with drafting Christian Ponder and Teddy Bridgewater and signing the likes of Matt Cassell, Case Keenum, Sam Bradford and Kirk Cousins. A vanilla group of QBs if there ever was one. He was part of an org that built an incredible roster but never found the right QB to get over the hump. I don’t want that happening here.

If we can land Aaron with this current roster - one that has a great mix of young, cheap talent and experienced vets - we have a 3-4 year window with a serious chance to bring home this org’s fourth (and maybe fifth) Lombardi. 

It's a testament to how incredibly hard it is to get out of QB purgatory when you have a good roster. Difference making QBs, until recently, have basically never been made available. And you're not likely to get a QB in the draft picking in the mid teens-20s. So you talk yourself into the tier of low end starters and try to make everything else perfect for them. But it's never enough. This can be an inescapable cycle. 

The biggest "swing" they took was trading for 40 year old Brett Favre and that's the closest that organization has come to a Super Bowl in the Spielman era. I think there's something to be learned from that. 

Edited May 17, 2021 by BroncoBruin

[ClockWorkOrange]

31 minutes ago, BroncoBruin said:

Okay, fine. I misunderstood.  "Overpay for someone else's success" was exclusively tied to this situation and not a general thing encompassing free agency (which every Broncos SB winner has been built off of). But judging from your posts about this draft and develop philosophy you seem to view as infallible, you must have hated that 2014 offseason when they let every one of their drafted contributors walk in free agency so they could sign four hired guns developed on other teams. But it ended up being the reason we won a Super Bowl. 

Regardless, I find your method of argument and the victimization pretty obnoxious and we're not getting anywhere. Pretty clear that you don't actually listen to anyone in good faith, which is a shame. 

Yes the "Overpay for someone else's success" Is the idea of paying 3 firsts and a starter for Rodgers. who was GB developmental project that was a success.  They got him as a draft pick at the end of the first round and let him sit behind the incumbent for 3 years preparing him for the start.  They developed the QB... Now, if we listen to some, we are willing to pay a massive sum for the player who was their success and now is at the end of the career.  This is a desperate plan that you are advocating for... a team or fans who want this IMO are desperate and not willing to build your own success and develop your own players.  This is not a personal insult on anyone but is a style of program development that I label as desperate and obviously I do not believe it leads to success.

I listen to you and disagree with your position.  I am sorry that this offends you.  I will try and be kinder with my words when referring to you.  As for the victimization... I was only surprised when we were talking about something that had nothing to do with discussion... I found it frustrating to start splitting hairs about something completely irrelevant to the concept of building a franchise and the methodology behind it.    

[ClockWorkOrange]

1 hour ago, BroncoBruin said:

So it's okay for Tampa to chase championships because they didn't give up future assets who wouldn't have affected their pursuit of a title last year. Got it. Here's a dose of reality: if Brady retired this offseason, the first round picks they didn't need to give up wouldn't make a difference in the next few years. Because A) they'd be back in QB purgatory and B) the "window" for a great roster only lasts a few years (see: 2017 Eagles)

Yes of course it is okay for Tampa Bay to pick up Brady...  If it was not Brady, it would have been someone else.  Aging vets are looking for these deep teams.  It is one of the great advantages of building a deep team through the draft and valuing draft capitol... I do not think you are even reading my posts as I you keep saying things that I have explained many times.  How is this a surprise to you here?  This is another such example that proves this...  Read the bolded text below as it explains that picking up aging vets who are willing to play for less to win as one of the advantages for for the philosophy that I am advocating for and that Paton has described all off season.  I have stated this many times today.  How are you asking this question if you are actually listening?  All your upset is just a series of misunderstandings because you are reacting and not reading.  Please engage in a conversation with me... I like to talk and listen to others talk football.  It is why I returned to these forums.  

On 5/16/2021 at 2:58 PM, ClockWorkOrange said:

Oh that is easy... Paton.  I love his commitment to the philosophy that you fill holes with short term contracts in FA and you draft BPA and trade back BPA in the draft.  The idea here is that you elevate the overall team ability by surrounding each player with talent and creating true competition at each position grouping.  This result is in layers of good players competing with each other for the starting position.  You spend less draft capitol on stars as you have a next man up which also makes you resilient to injury...  With this philosophy you win with 4 star talent that plays like 5 star talent due to over all team depth...   You give up paying big money on splash FAs like James to fill holes... and keep overloading position groups until they are layered with depth.  

Do's:

• Get more draft picks... More darts as Paton would put it.  
  • Historically, about half of his picks contribute in some fashion for his system
• Draft BPA and trade back BPA based on team evaluations and scheme fit... never position need
• Fill holes in FA when you need to, but keep contracts short so you can allow BPA in draft to fill positions as it presents
• Prioritize resigning your own players who carry team values and culture... gets more out of your players in effort and retains team chemistry as apposed to onboarding new FA and needing to rebuild relationships and team concepts
• Draft team first players that are looking for a long term home
• Prioritize intelligence in player evaluations
• Allow 5 star players to test the market.  Some will stay for less
• Create competition at each group.  Let the comp determine starters 

Do nots:

• Do not pay big money in FA.  James is the ultimate example...  
• No long term contracts in FA unless its a resigning of your own guys.  
• Do not overvalue talent.  Talent, intelligence, team first = football player.  No me fist guys
• Do not assign starters due to contract size or draft status

Advantages:

• Players cost less against the cap due being a draft built team and letting 5 start players go else where
• 5 star talent will sometimes stay for less or cap friendly contracts and with often restructure for team success
• Allows for more sophisticated concepts to be used due to prioritizing own players in FA and the prioritization of team intelligence in acquisition of players
• Resistance to injury as it you invest in more players rather than flash pan acquisitions or 5 star recruits
• Tends to attract aging vets for less who want to win with team that has layered depth in the trenches and strong team culture

Disadvantages

• Takes longer to build due to growth vs purchase philosophy
• You have to be willing to let 5 star players walk to get over all team depth high
  • Can keep a few 5 star players if they play for less and contribute to team more dynamically
• Needs a fan base that knows football and understands team values and the cyclical nature off team sports

 

I have to go, but there is more to this that I need to share, but I have played and coached football and believe in this philosophy completely.  Also, Elway was horrible about this so do not use any of his philosophy or picks against Paton... Elway is not a trained GM.  He is a player moonlighting as GM due to popularity.  Think NE for an NFL comparison... 

 

 

Edited May 17, 2021 by ClockWorkOrange

[AKRNA]

27 minutes ago, ClockWorkOrange said:

Yes of course it is okay for Tampa Bay to pick up Brady...  If it was not Brady, it would have been someone else.  Aging vets are looking for these deep teams.  It is one of the great advantages of building a deep team through the draft and valuing draft capitol... I do not think you are even reading my posts as I you keep saying things that I have explained many times.  How is this a surprise to you here?  This is another such example that proves this...  Read the bolded text below as it explains that picking up aging vets who are willing to play for less to win as one of the advantages for for the philosophy that I am advocating for and that Paton has described all off season.  I have stated this many times today.  How are you asking this question if you are actually listening?  All your upset is just a series of misunderstandings because you are reacting and not reading.  Please engage in a conversation with me... I like to talk and listen to others talk football.  It is why I returned to these forums.  

 

Speaking of which, I noticed the FA roles are still filled with solid 30+ yo vets at multiple positions. Very recognizable names like Geno Atkins, Kawann Short, Sheldon Richardson, etc. just on the DL.  I'm sure many of them still have something left in the tank.

I think we'll see some roster fillers out of these ranks on one year deals. Just imagine Justin Houston as a back up playing about 25% of the snaps. He'd be a nasty fresh face in the 4th quarter. 

 

 

 

 

[CWood21]

19 hours ago, ClockWorkOrange said:

Minnesota has more draft picks than any other franchise in the last 12 years and the next team isn't even close.  Broncos started the day with 7 picks and ended up with 10... Paton said he wanted to get at least 10 picks before the draft was over... They gathered picks up as they went.  The reason they did not trade back with the 9th pick is because that was their top defensive player and they had him as a top 5 pick on their board... Not sure what you are referring to... 

And they've got zip to show for it.