Rumor from Denver
 

Just heard from a friend in the Denver area who has some access to the Denver Broncos.

According to him, the Broncos are seriously considering trading down from their #2 pick with the objective of getting a lower pick in round 1 plus a pick in the second round. As things stand now, the Broncos have 3 picks in the top 50 but the thinking at the moment is that the Broncos need upgrades in enough places that the #2 pick is best used to get 2 players instead of only 1.

Two teams mentioned as potentially interested in such a deal are the Saints and the Dolphins. [SIZE="1"][B][Aside: I don't know what the Saints might do with the #2 overall pick but I would have to think the Dolphins would use it on a QB.][/B][/SIZE]


This is a [B]RUMOR[/B] - - but it comes from someone whose knowledge of the workings of the Broncos has been pretty good in the past.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

Well Darth Hoody and the Patriots have the ammo to move up if they want.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

The Patriots are going to steal the draft this year and get younger (if that's possible) and better. They are loaded with high round draft picks.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

Yeah there's been talk that they'd look to trade out because they're not prepared to pay anyone 2nd overall draft money. So unless things change with pay scales, they'll probably seriously consider trading out. Good luck finding a partner though.

As for the Saints, one rumor had them sending Pierre Thomas to New England for a pick

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

for the redskins perceptive, I'd only trade for that pick for Nick Fairley only. And really I wouldn't do that, so no thanks to the #2 overall pick.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=SmootSmack;783443]Yeah there's been talk that they'd look to trade out because they're not prepared to pay anyone 2nd overall draft money. So unless things change with pay scales, they'll probably seriously consider trading out. Good luck finding a partner though.

As for the Saints, one rumor had them sending Pierre Thomas to New England for a pick[/quote]

They've said that for 2 years now. As for Denver there is also talks of them Trading Orton also. Who know's at this point. If we were to trade up I would take Peterson or Miller but aint happening

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

Gaaaah....I hope we don't get involved in this claptrap.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

Nice! A rumor from a friend with no sources cited.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;783445]for the redskins perceptive, I'd only trade for that pick for Nick Fairley only. And really I wouldn't do that, so no thanks to the #2 overall pick.[/quote]I don't think I'd go get Fairley to play DE in a 3-4. If we were in a 4-3 then yes, I'd get him as a 3-tech, but in a 3-4 I think he'll be less effective.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=Buster;783476]Nice! A rumor from a friend with no sources cited.[/quote]

Buster:

Very simple. My friend would not want his identity known on a site related to an NFL team; it would not do him any good professionally. So, I have tried to give folks here an idea of what he told me and a generic description of his history related to the Broncos franchise.

If you prefer not to read about rumors - - where even if sources are cited they are probably not all that authoritative or else it would not be a rumor - - stay away from threads with that in the title.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

Wrong direction in the draft. We need to move out of the top 10, asap. We [U][B]need[/B][/U] draft picks.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=Monksdown;783493]Wrong direction in the draft. We need to move out of the top 10, asap. We [U][B]need[/B][/U] draft picks.[/quote]

This team always ends up with the short end of the stick...

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=diehard;783498]This team always ends up with the short end of the stick...[/quote]

Thats bcuz of dumb ass VC/DS now MS/BA are running things lets hope they change it

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=Buster;783476]Nice! A rumor from a friend with no sources cited.[/quote]

How do you think that rumors get started and there become sources to cite? It's not like teams run to the papers with every idea that they think of lol

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

We need to find a way to get 10 draft picks this year so we can draft 10 offensive lineman and run an offense with 1 QB, 1 RB, 1 TE, and 8 Offensive Lineman. Sometimes we'll take one offensive lineman out and put in a second Tight End. We'll call that our spread formation. Oh and no QB's drafted on day 1. This offense is strictly limited to serviceable veterans and young developmental late round prospects who will never see the field because they are "developing."

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;783534]We need to find a way to get 10 draft picks this year so we can draft 10 offensive lineman and run an offense with 1 QB, 1 RB, 1 TE, and 8 Offensive Lineman. Sometimes we'll take one offensive lineman out and put in a second Tight End. We'll call that our spread formation. Oh and no QB's drafted on day 1. This offense is strictly limited to serviceable veterans and young developmental late round prospects who will never see the field because they are "developing."[/quote]
I endorse this post and the sarcasm used to create it.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=sportscurmudgeon;783489]Buster:

Very simple. My friend would not want his identity known on a site related to an NFL team; it would not do him any good professionally. So, I have tried to give folks here an idea of what he told me and a generic description of his history related to the Broncos franchise.

If you prefer not to read about rumors - - where even if sources are cited they are probably not all that authoritative or else it would not be a rumor - - stay away from threads with that in the title.[/quote]

Don't be such a curmudgeon. :D

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=Ruhskins;783425]Well Darth Hoody and the Patriots have the ammo to move up if they want.[/quote]Unless Hoody sees a player he really likes in the first round (Jerod Mayo for example), he typically trades down and stockpiles late 1st and 2nd round picks, which are usually productive players at a cap-friendly price. I wish that we worked the draft the way NE and Philly do.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;783505]Thats bcuz of dumb ass VC/DS now MS/BA are running things lets hope they change it[/quote]

You mean like trading for McNabb and giving up a 2nd and 4th rd picks to the Eagles for a QB that Shanny does not want any more. So now what can we recoop any picks or pick for McNabb this year? If we dont what a waste of 2 picks for us.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

This Rumor apparently has roots:

[url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/early-lead/post/redskins-nfl-draft-rumor-du-jour-features-broncos/2011/04/13/AFSArtVD_blog.html]Redskins’ NFL draft rumor du jour features Broncos - The Early Lead - The Washington Post[/url]

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

Well, as I said earlier in this thread Broncos rumors are tied as much to them looking to save some money as anything else. End of the day I think they stay at #2. And yes, MS does like Gabbert (or Kyle really does, I forget which one), but they're not trading up for anyone. I mean never say never, but I'd be totally stunned. If anything they'll trade up from the top of round 2

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

No way this trade happens. We don't have enough picks to move up 8 spots, and we can t afford losing a 2nd rd pick for Gabbert

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

Lets swap picks, send them Fat Albert, take Gabby done and done.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;783482]I don't think I'd go get Fairley to play DE in a 3-4. If we were in a 4-3 then yes, I'd get him as a 3-tech, but in a 3-4 I think he'll be less effective.[/quote]

SS33, who do you think is a pick at ten best fit to play DE in our scheme?

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

I honestly don't see the Skins throwing their only top two picks just to move up for one spot. They really need to, if anything at all, trade out of the #10 spot to pick up more draft picks themselves.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

This seems like a difficult year to trade back, especially in the top 5. The uncertianty w/the cba/lack thereof makes it hard to determine just how much teams will have to pay these picks. I think we're in a much better spot to trade back than Denver.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=NM Redskin;793435]Lets swap picks, send them [B]Fat Albert,[/B] take Gabby done and done.[/quote]If Fat Ass needed the O2 tank at least once a game here while playing at around sea level, could you imagine what he'd be like playing 8 games at Mile High?

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=backrow;793417]This Rumor apparently has roots:

[url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/early-lead/post/redskins-nfl-draft-rumor-du-jour-features-broncos/2011/04/13/AFSArtVD_blog.html]Redskins’ NFL draft rumor du jour features Broncos - The Early Lead - The Washington Post[/url][/quote]

It would cost them 1300 points in addition to their 10th pick this year to move up to #2 for Gabbert. It's a steep price to pay but as i have said time and again on here if it solves the 20 year QB problem it's a price worth paying. Franchise QB trumps all other needs. If Shanny views Gabbert as the QB that he wants to build around then GO GET HIM.

Look at it this way...would you trade Orakpo & T Williams for Sam Bradford? I love those 2 players but I would do that in a second. QB is the hardest hole to fill and you are not even in the game until you have one...

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=NM Redskin;793435]Lets swap picks, send them Fat Albert, take Gabby done and done.[/quote]

I think it would be more plausible to trade up with denver in the 2nd round giving them Haynesworth and our second round pick for their second round pick. Puts AH back in a 4-3 in the AFC West, far away from Washington.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=diehardskin2982;793478]I think it would be more plausible to trade up with denver in the 2nd round giving them Haynesworth and our second round pick for their second round pick. Puts AH back in a 4-3 in the AFC West, far away from Washington.[/quote]

We can't trade fatty or anyone else without a new CBA.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=celts32;793476]It would cost them 1300 points in addition to their 10th pick this year to move up to #2 for Gabbert. It's a steep price to pay but as i have said time and again on here if it solves the 20 year QB problem it's a price worth paying. Franchise QB trumps all other needs. If Shanny views Gabbert as the QB that he wants to build around then GO GET HIM.

Look at it this way...[B]would you trade Orakpo & T Williams for Sam Bradford[/B]? I love those 2 players but I would do that in a second. QB is the hardest hole to fill and you are not even in the game until you have one...[/quote]

Nope. Two quality players at the two most important positions after QB (the guy who protects the QB and the guy who rushes the other teams QB).

I understand and agree that QB is THE most important position and that franchise QB's are hard to find. BUT - the draft is a crapshoot at best, highly chosen QB's fail more often than they hit (No - haven't done the research on QB's taken in top 5 (recently) but believe this is true). Don't go reaching for QB's at the expense of building the supporting cast - it deprives the young QB of additional young talent and puts more pressure on him while playing the sport's most difficult position. If we were stocked everywhere BUT QB, then yes - by all means trade up. But we're not. Trading up for a QB when we have such an overall dearth of talent only sets up the highly rated QB to catastrophicallly fail.

Keep the pick or trade down. If the right QB is there, okay - take him. Then use remaining picks to help him. It's not like Gabbert is being touted as the 2nd coming of Manning or Elway. From all that I have read, he is not even rated as highly as Bradford was and, if Luck had come out, would be likely be the 2nd or 3rd rated QB.

Trading up is a luxury affordable to teams deep in talent. Otherwise, to build for the long term, cheap young talent that can be developed is what is needed. The QB issue will be resolved, first we need to build a team that allows a young QB to succeed and a good QB to thrive.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

You make some good points and i am sure a lot of people on here agree with you. I am just looking at it from the angle of which holes are more difficult to fill in terms of finding them and ultimately training them to play. We are already a year into the Shanny regime...we simply have to have the QB this year to start grooming him. As for the many other holes on the team...we have a cleaned out cap and eventually the biggest crop of free agents ever to choose from. We can select some young players from that group and use whatever other draft picks we have also. Basically there are a lot of other ways to build a team other then with high draft picks but you will rarely if ever find a Franchise QB that way. So if in Shannys mind he can solve the QB problem with a couple of #1 picks then he should do it.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

Trading up for someone like Gabbert is a horrible idea. He's not a Manning or even Bradford type of prospect. Solving the QB issue is just one piece of the puzzle.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=Mattyk;793503]Trading up for someone like Gabbert is a horrible idea. He's not a Manning or even Bradford type of prospect. Solving the QB issue is just one piece of the puzzle.[/quote]

I agree that based on what were hearing publically these QB's are not worth that type of move up. However, how good you or I or the media think Gabbert is is not whats important. It's how good Shannahan thinks he is that matters. He probably doesn't think he's worth it, but I don't want to hear him open his mouth in May like he did last year when he said Bradford was the best QB prospect he has seen in years. I want them to take action based on what their evaluation of these QB's tells them to do. Maybe that evaluation this year should tell them to do nothing and draft defense high and pick a QB in the 5th round. but clearly last years evaluation of Bradford should have led them to trade up to the #1 pick and they decided not to for whatever reason. I don't want that to happen again...

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

I know you're a fan of getting a guy at any cost - based on Shanahan's actions last year he clearly is not.

Bradford was a good prospect, but still not a trade your future away for him type.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

There is no indication that you draft a "franchise QB" and the rest just falls in place. There's a reason we didnt trade up to get Bradford. More than likely the Rams were asking for far too much to the point where it would stunt the growth of our team in other spots.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=Mattyk;793507]I know you're a fan of getting a guy at any cost - based on Shanahan's actions last year he clearly is not.

Bradford was a good prospect, but still not a trade your future away for him type.[/quote]

I think based on what Shannahan said he was worth it.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=GreekSkin;793508]There is no indication that you draft a "franchise QB" and the rest just falls in place. There's a reason we didnt trade up to get Bradford. More than likely the Rams were asking for far too much to the point where it would stunt the growth of our team in other spots.[/quote]

The rest doesn't just fall in to place but look at the teams that win consistently. How many of them have average QB's? Great QB play covers up a lot of holes. They move the ball and keep the defense off the field...they make quick decisions with the ball that makes their OL look better then it really is...they keep the 8th man out of the box and improve the running game. The best example of this is the Colts who have a 4 win roster without Manning.

The reason I want them to be aggressive is because this position does not just fall to you. they are incredibly hard to find. The Redskins have been looking for a QB for most of the last 25 years.

Suppose like most fans want, the redskins improve the overall roster but ignore QB...maybe they even improve enough to win 9 or 10 games with one of their retread QB's. Now they are ready to add that franchise QB and become an actual super bowl contender...only now they are drafting in the low 20's instead of the top 10 and it's that much harder to find this QB. Not to mention the fact that then he needs his year or 2 to get up to speed and he does not have the luxury of the extra time while we are rebuilding because we are good now and we need him to step right in and play at a high level so we can make a super bowl run.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=freddyg12;793466]This seems like a difficult year to trade back, especially in the top 5. The uncertianty w/the cba/lack thereof makes it hard to determine just how much teams will have to pay these picks. I think we're in a much better spot to trade back than Denver.[/quote]

Exactly how much of a difference in pay will it be? I know significant from the #1 pick to #10 but honestly their going to have to pay someone to perform the job. As far as the CBA goes I don't think either side had a problem with the Rookie Cap. The owners want it, the players want it because the not used money can be used for the vets on the team or keeping the vets on the team. If anything at all the players are using it as a bargining chip for something else, but I'm sure the Rookie Cap will be in place this year so teams really don't need to worry about what they will be paying the #2 spot.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=celts32;793497]You make some good points and i am sure a lot of people on here agree with you. I am just looking at it from the angle of which holes are more difficult to fill in terms of finding them and ultimately training them to play. [B]We are already a year into the Shanny regime[/B]...we simply have to have the QB this year to start grooming him. As for the many other holes on the team...we have a cleaned out cap and eventually the biggest crop of free agents ever to choose from. We can select some young players from that group and use whatever other draft picks we have also. Basically there are a lot of other ways to build a team other then with high draft picks but you will rarely if ever find a Franchise QB that way. So if in Shannys mind he can solve the QB problem with a couple of #1 picks then he should do it.[/quote]

I guess I just don't get the panick mode mentality? "OMG, MS is one year removed from his 5 yr deal." "OMG, MS might not be able to complete his work unless we get a QB this yr."

I'm just baffled. MS still has 4 yrs to include this one. Get the OL and DL set and any supporting staff, use Grossman and Beck this yr, next yr 2012 throw your picks in to get Luck, and pick up a WR and RB. Then they would still have 3 yrs to develope and make a SB run. I'm sure if they do well and this team is on the right track Snyder will most likely resign MS or hire his son as HC to allow the completion of the work already done.