GDT: Broncos @ Raiders

[daineraider]

23 hours ago, Broncofan said:

Given Talib's history, I think it's 50-50 for a 1-game suspension.  Crabtree certainly was the instigator, but Talib throwing 3-4 punches and his past history doesn't help here (Crabtree would have to get 1 game as well to justify Talib getting a game FWIW given Crabtree was the instigator).  The fact they missed most of the game probably saves Talib (and Crabtree here).

Crabtree was trying to get him back for the chain, but it was a childish move.

[Broncofan]

1 hour ago, daineraider said:

Crabtree was trying to get him back for the chain, but it was a childish move.

Absolutely.  Let's face it, neither guy looks good here.  Especially since Talib clearly was in the wrong last year - total punk move.   So they get 2 more games plus the actual game itself. 

It hurts you guys more since you actually have some playoff hope - for us, Talib's 2 game suspension actually helps us long-term - we need the higher pick, and we get 2/16 salary relief for Talib's 11M salary (so do you, but obviously you take W's if you are still thinking playoffs).  That 1.55M rollover for 2018+ is a gift to us with no hope for 2017.

Given the letter Runyan sent to both, I think Crabtree has a better shot to get it reduced to 1 game, TBH.    They clearly factored in Talib's past (which is harder to appeal), and Crabtree's instigating actions (which I actually get why he was still upset after last year, but he was the aggressor here).  

 

[daineraider]

1 hour ago, Broncofan said:

Absolutely.  Let's face it, neither guy looks good here.  Especially since Talib clearly was in the wrong last year - total punk move.   So they get 2 more games plus the actual game itself. 

It hurts you guys more since you actually have some playoff hope - for us, Talib's 2 game suspension actually helps us long-term - we need the higher pick, and we get 2/16 salary relief for Talib's 11M salary (so do you, but obviously you take W's if you are still thinking playoffs).  That 1.55M rollover for 2018+ is a gift to us with no hope for 2017.

Given the letter Runyan sent to both, I think Crabtree has a better shot to get it reduced to 1 game, TBH.    They clearly factored in Talib's past (which is harder to appeal), and Crabtree's instigating actions (which I actually get why he was still upset after last year, but he was the aggressor here).  

 

It hurts us more because we now will be without Crabtree and probably Cooper this week.  You guys have solid CBs behind Talib.  I find 2 games to be too much being how early they were ejected in our game.  That's essentially 3 games each, which without any major landed punches, I find to be excessive punishment.  Andre Johnson and Finnegan weren't suspended at all and that fight was crazy a few years back.

[thebestever6]

I'll take it lol hopefully we can be 3 and 10 two weeks from now. I just want to lose out so Elway and company have every opportunity in the off season to improve the team and qb. I'm not super confident it will happen but I don't want any excuses. 

I'd also love to see Paxton back the last two games so Elway gets completley on board turning the page. 

[BroncosFan2010]

I don't think we have talked enough about how bad Brenden Langley looked against Oakland. He was absolutely toasted on the final play that sealed the game, and I initially thought we had a LB on Patterson. He was also abused for a TD and numerous other times on the outside. I saw zero flashes from him last game in terms of coverage or playmaking. I hated the pick at the time and continue to scratch my head. Like Lonzo Doss, our scouting department must have seen his 6 INT as a Senior, and his good timings at the combine, and his size, and overlooked the fact that he is terrible in his backpedal, terrible technique and gives a huge cushion (Likely this allowed him to jump routes and get those 6 INT as a Senior, but overall its a bad way to play the position).

We need 3 legitimate contributors from 2018 draft class and another 2 to step up from 2017, as well as a new coach and QBOTF, AND 2-3 cost friendly FA signings to get back atop this division. Its going to be quite difficult, but a QB and legitimate coach can go a long way.

[champ11]

6 minutes ago, BroncosFan2010 said:

I don't think we have talked enough about how bad Brenden Langley looked against Oakland. He was absolutely toasted on the final play that sealed the game, and I initially thought we had a LB on Patterson. He was also abused for a TD and numerous other times on the outside. I saw zero flashes from him last game in terms of coverage or playmaking. I hated the pick at the time and continue to scratch my head. Like Lonzo Doss, our scouting department must have seen his 6 INT as a Senior, and his good timings at the combine, and his size, and overlooked the fact that he is terrible in his backpedal, terrible technique and gives a huge cushion (Likely this allowed him to jump routes and get those 6 INT as a Senior, but overall its a bad way to play the position).

We need 3 legitimate contributors from 2018 draft class and another 2 to step up from 2017, as well as a new coach and QBOTF, AND 2-3 cost friendly FA signings to get back atop this division. Its going to be quite difficult, but a QB and legitimate coach can go a long way.

Yeah I remember being really impressed with Webster athletically his rookie year, didn't see anything from Langley on Sunday

[Broncofan]

1 hour ago, BroncosFan2010 said:

I don't think we have talked enough about how bad Brenden Langley looked against Oakland. He was absolutely toasted on the final play that sealed the game, and I initially thought we had a LB on Patterson. He was also abused for a TD and numerous other times on the outside. I saw zero flashes from him last game in terms of coverage or playmaking. I hated the pick at the time and continue to scratch my head. Like Lonzo Doss, our scouting department must have seen his 6 INT as a Senior, and his good timings at the combine, and his size, and overlooked the fact that he is terrible in his backpedal, terrible technique and gives a huge cushion (Likely this allowed him to jump routes and get those 6 INT as a Senior, but overall its a bad way to play the position).

We need 3 legitimate contributors from 2018 draft class and another 2 to step up from 2017, as well as a new coach and QBOTF, AND 2-3 cost friendly FA signings to get back atop this division. Its going to be quite difficult, but a QB and legitimate coach can go a long way.

And so we're clear, it wasn't like there weren't useful DB's to be had at 3.101.   My favorite was Howard Wilson, who got injured for CLE, but LAC took Desmond King - and while I thought he'd be a S, he's actually excelled at slot CB - hasn't allowed a TD there with 200+ snaps in the slot.   I know we'd say Harris excels in the slot - but again it's a case of reaching for a mega-raw guy way earlier than needed, because Elway had to have "his guy"...with much better choices on the board.    

The criticism that Langley, C-Henderson and McKenzie were that they were uber-raw and nowhere near ready to help - and that it seemed like we were tripling up to find ST contributors and catch lightning in a bottle with speed-only guys...who couldn't actually play pro-level football.  That's been 100 percent proven so far.  And while Year 1 is too early to write off rookies for their draft impact as individuals, the fact we went 4-wide in this draft (add DE Demarcus Walker as a guy nowhere near ready to help at 3-4 DE, needs a year of weight gain/technique acquisition, and we knew it), it's astounding - when Elway spent the offseason selling it as upgrading the speed on the team for this year - to get "playmakers".   I have no problem if you spend Day 3 picks on these guys...but we spent valuable draft capital where actual useful guys could have been acquired - which was Elway's stated goal, for a 2017 impact (again, I think that's a huge mistake that Elway's adopted of late, as you really need to look at drafts helping you in year 2+ for most guys outside of Rds 1-2...but Elway's both missing on his approach, and then taking guys who have no technique/football skills to have that impact).    

Langley (and C-Henderson, McKenzie) epitomize the problem we have in our evaluation process - we're taking projection and ignoring football skills.  To be clear, you take polished guys with no physical skills to excel in the NFL - you'll fail too.   It's why Elway's home-run approach works so well in Day 3 - they're all fliers, so better to take the insane-ceiling guy.   But there has to be some balance, especially in the earlier rounds, when good talent that has both a nice ceiling and a safe floor can be found.  Elway has just ignored floor to go ceiling-only - that's great in Day 3 - Day 1-2 not so much, with the alternatives available.   None of those 3 guys had even close to NFL-level skills to stay on the field (beyond returning kicks) - and we needed 3 picks, and 2 Day 2 picks, to get this?  Horror show.

[thebestever6]

21 minutes ago, Broncofan said:

And so we're clear, it wasn't like there weren't useful DB's to be had at 3.101.   My favorite was Howard Wilson, who got injured for CLE, but LAC took Desmond King - and while I thought he'd be a S, he's actually excelled at slot CB - hasn't allowed a TD there with 200+ snaps in the slot.   I know we'd say Harris excels in the slot - but again it's a case of reaching for a mega-raw guy way earlier than needed, because Elway had to have "his guy"...with much better choices on the board.    

The criticism that Langley, C-Henderson and McKenzie were that they were uber-raw and nowhere near ready to help - and that it seemed like we were tripling up to find ST contributors and catch lightning in a bottle with speed-only guys...who couldn't actually play pro-level football.  That's been 100 percent proven so far.  And while Year 1 is too early to write off rookies for their draft impact as individuals, the fact we went 4-wide in this draft (add DE Demarcus Walker as a guy nowhere near ready to help at 3-4 DE, needs a year of weight gain/technique acquisition, and we knew it), it's astounding - when Elway spent the offseason selling it as upgrading the speed on the team for this year - to get "playmakers".   I have no problem if you spend Day 3 picks on these guys...but we spent valuable draft capital where actual useful guys could have been acquired - which was Elway's stated goal, for a 2017 impact (again, I think that's a huge mistake that Elway's adopted of late, as you really need to look at drafts helping you in year 2+ for most guys outside of Rds 1-2...but Elway's both missing on his approach, and then taking guys who have no technique/football skills to have that impact).    

Langley (and C-Henderson, McKenzie) epitomize the problem we have in our evaluation process - we're taking projection and ignoring football skills.  To be clear, you take polished guys with no physical skills to excel in the NFL - you'll fail too.   It's why Elway's home-run approach works so well in Day 3 - they're all fliers, so better to take the insane-ceiling guy.   But there has to be some balance, especially in the earlier rounds, when good talent that has both a nice ceiling and a safe floor can be found.  Elway has just ignored floor to go ceiling-only - that's great in Day 3 - Day 1-2 not so much, with the alternatives available.   None of those 3 guys had even close to NFL-level skills to stay on the field (beyond returning kicks) - and we needed 3 picks, and 2 Day 2 picks, to get this?  Horror show.

I think Elway knew this year would have growing pains I didn't think he would think it was going to be this bad but I have no problem with the year 1 production. 

[BroncosFan2010]

Quote

I think Elway knew this year would have growing pains I didn't think he would think it was going to be this bad but I have no problem with the year 1 production. 

You should have issues with the year 1 production. McKenzie is a bust. Players that make impact plays as returners almost ALWAYS do so from the get-go. He has not, and rest assured that is why we drafted him, to give us our poor-mans Tyreke Hill. He may be an exception to the rule, but generally speaking returners are dangerous from the 1st day or don't pan out. If he isnt giving us upper percentile production as a returner, then he shouldn't be on this team. He offers nothing as a WR.

Langley has a small sample size but you want at least a single flash from a rookie R3 pick in their first game w/ PT. He was a true liability with no redeeming qualities last game. For a team with supposedly the best DB developmental coaches in the league, that's a bad sign.

This team would be significantly better of going forward if we drafted Reuben Foster R1, Dan Feeney R2 and Jourdan Lewis R3. And that's not with hindsight, those were all guys that many wanted at their draft position before the draft, during the draft and after the draft.

[thebestever6]

1 hour ago, BroncosFan2010 said:

You should have issues with the year 1 production. McKenzie is a bust. Players that make impact plays as returners almost ALWAYS do so from the get-go. He has not, and rest assured that is why we drafted him, to give us our poor-mans Tyreke Hill. He may be an exception to the rule, but generally speaking returners are dangerous from the 1st day or don't pan out. If he isnt giving us upper percentile production as a returner, then he shouldn't be on this team. He offers nothing as a WR.

Langley has a small sample size but you want at least a single flash from a rookie R3 pick in their first game w/ PT. He was a true liability with no redeeming qualities last game. For a team with supposedly the best DB developmental coaches in the league, that's a bad sign.

This team would be significantly better of going forward if we drafted Reuben Foster R1, Dan Feeney R2 and Jourdan Lewis R3. And that's not with hindsight, those were all guys that many wanted at their draft position before the draft, during the draft and after the draft.

McKenzie was a guy drafted to be a poor mans tyreek hill but Carlos Henderson can still fill that along with slot role. Bolles hasn't played terrible still think thats  a better pick than Foster, and Langley was a converted wr comsidered a project  cb time was always warranted. 

If this team would  of had  superbowl aspirations with the  draft  you presented  I would change  my tune.

[broncos67]

4 minutes ago, thebestever6 said:

McKenzie was a guy drafted to be a poor mans tyreek hill but Carlos Henderson can still fill that along with slot role. Bolles hasn't played terrible still think thats  a better pick than Foster, and Langley was a converted wr comsidered a project  cb time was always warranted. 

If this team would  of had  superbowl aspirations with the  draft  you presented  I would change  my tune.

That's the problem with the "poor man's Tyreke Hill" thing- Elway went balls to the wall trying to mimic something a divisional rival has but did't take into account anything about the general usefulness of a player. If you're drafting a guy to be Tyreke Hill, we don't need 2, and really 3 if you factor in Langley. It's redundant and bizarre. Frankly, we'd have been better off keeping Kalif Raymond and drafting more useful players at other positions. Bolles may or may not be a better pick than Foster in Year 1, but I'm skeptical it'll be a better pick in Years 2-whenever.

Langley was definitely a project. A project we over drafted ahead of: Trey Hendrickson, Dede Westbrook, Jaleel Johnson, Samaje Perine, Mack Hollins, Tarik Cohen and Jaylen Reeves-Maybin. All of the above guys have played this year in a higher capacity than Langley. It was yet another example of a garbage wasted pick.

[BroncosFan2010]

Quote

If this team would  of had  superbowl aspirations with the  draft  you presented  I would change  my tune.

I don't understand this line of reasoning. If anything Bolles was a pick that indicated we wanted to 'win now'. Old and at a position of DIRE need. You can argue that the speedsters were picks made with upside in mind more than 'win now', but to me those guys were simply picked because Elway and Co. got uncreative and decided to try and copycat KC and Tyreke Hill.

Guys like Dan Feeney, Foster and Lewis are not just 'win now' types with a Super Bowl in mind, they are all also guys with pretty high ceilings. Also, why look for a project with a 'high ceiling' to win in the future when you can take a guy like Feeney or Lewis that are already halfway to becoming starters / elite players. 'High ceiling' doesn't mean much with a project if their starting point is a PS player, like Langley. The possibility that he reaches that ceiling is very low. A guy like Jourdan Lewis might have a 'lower ceiling' because he doesn't have as far to go to become a starting caliber player. He has already reached a good deal of his potential.

I think were at the point where Elway should not get the benefit of the doubt when it comes to the draft. I see that you still give it to him, but I don't at this juncture.

[jolly red giant]

3 hours ago, BroncosFan2010 said:

I don't understand this line of reasoning. If anything Bolles was a pick that indicated we wanted to 'win now'. Old and at a position of DIRE need. You can argue that the speedsters were picks made with upside in mind more than 'win now', but to me those guys were simply picked because Elway and Co. got uncreative and decided to try and copycat KC and Tyreke Hill.

Guys like Dan Feeney, Foster and Lewis are not just 'win now' types with a Super Bowl in mind, they are all also guys with pretty high ceilings. Also, why look for a project with a 'high ceiling' to win in the future when you can take a guy like Feeney or Lewis that are already halfway to becoming starters / elite players. 'High ceiling' doesn't mean much with a project if their starting point is a PS player, like Langley. The possibility that he reaches that ceiling is very low. A guy like Jourdan Lewis might have a 'lower ceiling' because he doesn't have as far to go to become a starting caliber player. He has already reached a good deal of his potential.

I think were at the point where Elway should not get the benefit of the doubt when it comes to the draft. I see that you still give it to him, but I don't at this juncture.

Elway over estimated the team and over estimated the coach he hired to run the team.

[BroncosFan2010]

Quote

Elway over estimated the team and over estimated the coach he hired to run the team.

That's fine, but a bad pick is a bad pick regardless. Elway has been a poor talent evaluator as of late.

Make the right moves (Sign Whitworth, sign Leary, sign Peko, draft Reuben Foster over Bolles, Ben Feeney over Walker, Jourdan Lewis over Henderson, Ryan Switzer later in the draft as returner, Dorian Johnson rather than Langley, although he has done little in AZ he was an excellent prospect) and this team is in contention to win a surprisingly weak division and Siemien isn't shell-shocked.

[paul-mac]

5 hours ago, BroncosFan2010 said:

That's fine, but a bad pick is a bad pick regardless. Elway has been a poor talent evaluator as of late.

Make the right moves (Sign Whitworth, sign Leary, sign Peko, draft Reuben Foster over Bolles, Ben Feeney over Walker, Jourdan Lewis over Henderson, Ryan Switzer later in the draft as returner, Dorian Johnson rather than Langley, although he has done little in AZ he was an excellent prospect) and this team is in contention to win a surprisingly weak division and Siemien isn't shell-shocked.

 

Bolles was a great pick, man. Now I know you're specifically considering a vacuum where we signed Whitworth, but we have to look at each move individually. Bolles has been above average as a rookie Left Tackle, probably our 2nd best Offensive Lineman. I'm confident we've found our starter for the next decade, and franchise Left Tackles can be as hard to find as QBs.