Denver Broncos blog, news and rumors


FB

[hype it up!]
[Share with Yardbarker]

Published on 02/21/2011 at Mon Feb 21 10:11.
Tagged: ,,,,.



Daily Links – Peterson at #2

Posted Mon Feb 21st by

  • An in-depth Denver Broncos mock draft. [Predominantly Orange]
  • The moment Kyle Orton, the Broncos‘ union player rep, gets an answer regarding the CBA negotiations may be the same moment his future in Denver becomes more clear. [Denver Post]
  • Orton says he’s only had one meeting, and that one very brief, with head coach John Fox. [Yahoo! Sports]
  • A few dozen fans rallied at INVESCO Field at Mile High over the weekend in support of their cause: the Broncos re-signing Champ Bailey. [DPO]
  • Fox has his plate full — with combine interviews all week, he’s yet to even fully move in to Denver. [DPO]
  • Rams part-owner Stan Kroenke could be in hot water for getting involved in Denver Nuggets/Carmelo Anthony trade negotiations. [ProFootballTalk]
  • Big_Pete

    I've said it before, and I'll say it again…
    Champ Bailey >>> Patrick Peterson.
    If our defense blew this bad with Champ, then obviously CB isn't our “need” position. A CB can only cover for so long. We need front 7 talent. That's where we'll draft. Unless Fox thinks that Doom and Ayers will be pro-bowlers on the DL, I can't see us passing on either Fairley or Bowers

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention Daily Links – Peterson at #2 - BroncoTalk -- Topsy.com()

  • http://twitter.com/themilehighguy Christopher McLean

    The Mock draft is pretty awesome if I do say so myself!

  • http://broncotalk.net Kyle

    We thought so too, hence the link to your piece Mr. Author. Keep up the good work at PO!

  • Guest

    Who is Dan Kronke

  • areferee

    It's Stan, but Kyle has a cold… :-)

  • Doom92

    Taking a CB, ANY CB, at #2 would be pathedic… I agree with Pete!!!

  • MrEast

    The problem with that is, Peterson >>> Bowers. Would you rather have a pro-bowl safety/corner or another DE bust?

  • MrEast

    Taking another bust would be even more pathetic. Bowers is a one year wonder who was complete garbage before in a pathetic conference.

  • mikebirty

    Ok so: Bailey >>> Peterson

    But what about:
    Bailey + Peterson = ?

  • Big_Pete

    I'd rather take another DE bust, because there is no guarantee that Peterson won't be a bust either. I'd rather swing and miss attempting to fix the broken aspect of our D instead of bolster our only strong part.
    Anyone who says “this draft pick is a can't miss” doesn't know a thing about football and the draft. There is no guarantees with draft picks.

  • Big_Pete

    Bailey + Peterson = CBs can still only cover for so long before the WR gets open because the QB has no pressure. Look what happens in the Pro Bowl when the DL isn't allowed to rush the passer. QB's find open WRs. Why? BECAUSE THERE IS NO PRESSURE ON THEM!!! Same thing happens during the regular season. You can have Champ and Revis on the same team, and the Broncos will still give up 32 points per game because without front 7 pressure, and I mean serious pressure, the other team will march up and down the field at will, just like they have been on us since 2005.

  • Big_Pete

    Then we move back a few spots if someone is chomping at the bit to take Bowers and we take the safest bet on the line. Point is that CB isn't our problem, front 7 is. Without QB pressure, Champ and Revis couldn't keep teams out of the endzone. They can only cover for so long before the QB finds the open WR or scrambles for a 1st down/TD

  • mikebirty

    Completely agree Pete with your logic but I just don't know about picking any of the D-Line prospects at #2. If Suh or McCoy or Long were available I'd be right with you.

  • Big_Pete

    Well, that's why they have the combine and personal workouts. What the Broncos should do is have Schlereth be a consultant, cause they can see things in their hips and stuff that most cant. Maybe in a workout for someone, they get blown away by someone. Maybe at the combine, Bowers is completely flawed. Then it would make no sense to draft him #2. Maybe there will be a beast who can do things Bowers only dreamed. Nobody knows. That's why they have the combine and workouts. All I'm saying is that taking a CB at #2 is a waste. We've had one of the all time bests there for 7 years, and our D has sucked every year but 2005. CB isn't the answer, front 7 pressure is. Especially with the NFL always changing rules that favor the WR and QB. It's harder and harder for a CB to cover. Soon, they will make it so hard to cover a WR that someone with Champ's ability will be no better than someone with Willie Middlebrooks (remember him?) ability.

  • MrEast

    This reasoning is why there are teams like the Bills and the Bengals. If you look at the consistent franchises you will see that they draft by the best position available.

    It's not smart to say every player is equally not a guarantee. Look at the Ravens, seldom do they draft a bust. There is a reason to their drafting rhyme.

    If you keep drafting players by best position available, pretty soon you will have all the best players at every position available. The Broncos can't afford to “swing and miss” anymore, they're pathetically low at nearly every talent level so nearly every place is a need.

  • MrEast

    Moving back isn't a horrible idea, but this will be a hard year to get a good value for doing so. There aren't any players this draft franchises are willing to mortgage their futures on.

  • MrEast

    The combine is a horrible place to solely evaluate a player, ask Vernon Gholston (aka DaQuan Bowers).

  • Malacara

    Do not think you can compare a regular season game with the Pro Bowl, because no team has all the QB's and WR's that are in the Pro Bowl, also, I think the pressure they can put up with Doom, Ayers a second rounder DT and a second rounder LB, will be better than what is put into a Pro Bowl game.. and Bailey and Peterson will not have to cover for so long as you say in every pass play

  • Big_Pete

    So we should be the Detroit Lions and draft a WR for the next few years, even though it's clearly a strength of our team? Hey, a WR might be the best player in the draft. He'd surely be the “best player available” to us at #2.
    What? You say that is stupid? Because we are already loaded at WR?
    Interesting, cause we are already strong at CB. We are inept at DL, hence we need to draft a DL at any cost, not “best player available”

  • Big_Pete

    So we should be the Detroit Lions and draft a WR for the next few years, even though it's clearly a strength of our team? Hey, a WR might be the best player in the draft. He'd surely be the “best player available” to us at #2.
    What? You say that is stupid? Because we are already loaded at WR?
    Interesting, cause we are already strong at CB. We are inept at DL, hence we need to draft a DL at any cost, not “best player available”