Ron Dayne to get bigger workload? (1 Viewer)

[SSOG]

So you give props to a guess that is relentlessly supported even though the facts indicate the contrary? You admire a guy who calls a RB a stud after 7 points (in your league) in two games?Interesting.

No, it is not a guess, and no, it is not unsupported by facts. I'll go through it again for you, very slowly.

EDUCATED OPINION- Mike Anderson is the starting RB this year until he goes down to injury.

FACTS SUPPORTING THIS OPINION-

*Mike Shanahan has said Anderson is the starting RB.

*Mike Shanahan traditionally does NOT use a RBBC.

*Mike Shanahan gave Mike Anderson the majority of the carries last week.

*Mike Shanahan has demonstrated a reasonably long RB leash in the past.

*Ron Dayne has... what, 8 carries as a Bronco? I don't know if any of you take statistics, but funny things start happening when you have such a small sample size.

EDUCATED OPINION- Mike Anderson is a stud RB this year.

SUPPORT FOR THIS OPINION-

*As I already covered, Mike Anderson is the starting RB in Denver.

*Historically, Denver's starting RBs are top 10 on a PPG basis.

*As Yudkin wrote last offseason, Anderson has a history of uber-studness.

*As has been noted in this Yudkin article, Denver has finished as the 2nd, 4th, and 6th ranked RB scoring teams over the last 3 season. They're also 3rd in points per touch over that span.

Now, your opinion is that Ron Dayne will take over as a starter. I would LOOOOOVE to see the "facts" that make this an "opinion" instead of merely a shot-in-the-dark guess.

I can see that some admire his sticking to his guns. On this topic he can't support his position with facts and there are many indicators that oppose his assertion that he chooses to ignore. It is hard for me to stick up for anyone who only looks at what supports his position and ignores the rest.

Hey look, I just supported my position with facts! Now, please show me the indicators that oppose my assertion that I choose to ignore? So far, I have seen TWO "indicators".

1) Shanny says he's unsure how the carries will shake out.

Rebuttal- His top 2 RBs are both injured. I can understand WHY he would be unsure. He doesn't even know if Bell is going to be able to go, and it's hard to guess how carries will shake out if you don't even know who will be suiting up. He DOES, however, clearly state that Anderson is the starter... and we just have to look at history to see what the starter in Denver can be counted on for.

2) Ron Dayne ran the critical 4th-and-1.

Rebuttal- And Mike Anderson ran a 3rd-and-2 that was every bit as critical on the same drive. So if Shanny trusts Dayne over Anderson, why didn't Dayne run that play? I can think of a reason for pulling Anderson out if you trust him more- don't want to aggravate his injury with another 6 carries. I can NOT think of a reason for leaving Anderson in if you trust Dayne more (and are just going to go to him one play later, anyway).

So, as you can see, I am not "ignoring" those indicators. I am using my knowledge of the situation and my reasoning powers to explain why those "indicators" aren't really indicators that Dayne will become "The Man" at all.

Basically, I'm of the opinion that saying Dayne will win the starting RB job is exactly the same as saying Johnson will win the starting RB job. Both COULD happen, but neither have any basis in reality at the moment. Feel free to fire back with whatever other "indicators" I'm ignoring, though.

His assertion that Anderson will be a stud runningback this year is a guess at best.

Incorrect. Denver's RBs average the third most fantasy points per touch. Mike Anderson is the second best FF back this millenium when getting 20 touches a game (behind Faulk and ahead of Holmes). Saying Denver's starting RB is a stud is no more of a guess than saying that Priest Holmes is a stud. Yes, there's some uncertainty involved. That's why it's called "predicting the future" and not "reading the future". That said, I think there's plenty of evidence that supports my "prediction". I mean, if Bell had won the starting job in Denver, nobody would argue that he was a stud, right? Well, Anderson has proven himself a BETTER RB than Bell, so if Bell would have been a stud, then Anderson is even moreso.

He has not had a good game yet' date=' and while I realize many players have yet to perform up to expectations, none of the slow starting "studs" have the competittion Anderson does.[/quote']Denver has played 2 games against the 3-4 defense. Denver has historically struggled against the 3-4 defense. I actually PREDICTED a bad game for Denver's rushing attack against San Diego. I'm sure you'll all tell me that that was a lucky guess, too. Just like when I PREDICTED that Anderson would win the starting job outright. And when I PREDICTED that Dayne would become the primary backup. Those were all just lucky guesses, right? Well, even if they were, you still might want to listen to me, because it seems that I'm extremely lucky when it comes to guessing how Denver's rushing situation will work out.

Anderson is afflicted with a painful injury that will take awhile to heal. Obviously he can play though it' date=' but is it affecting his play? Did it cause the fumble at the 2? Was it the reason Anderson was out for the final game winning drive?[/quote']The answer to the first two questions is yes. The answer to the final question is HE WASN'T OUT FOR THE FINAL GAME WINNING DRIVE. HE CONVERTED A KEY THIRD-AND-TWO PLAY, WHICH DEMONSTRATES THAT THE COACHES STILL TRUST HIM IN BIG SITUATIONS.

From NFL.com-

1-10-DEN20 (5:21) J.Plummer pass incomplete to A.Lelie.

2-10-DEN20 (5:14) J.Plummer pass to C.Adams to DEN 28 for 8 yards (D.Florence).

3-2-DEN28 (4:34) M.Anderson up the middle to DEN 30 for 2 yards (D.Edwards).

1-10-DEN30 (3:52) J.Plummer pass incomplete to C.Adams.

PENALTY on SD-Q.Jammer, Defensive Pass Interference, 4 yards, enforced at DEN 30 - No Play.

1-10-DEN34 (3:48) R.Dayne left tackle to DEN 47 for 13 yards (T.Kiel).

1-10-DEN47 (3:12) R.Dayne left tackle to SD 45 for 8 yards (D.Scott).

2-2-SD45 (2:35) R.Dayne right guard to SD 42 for 3 yards (R.Godfrey).

1-10-SD42 (2:00) J.Plummer pass incomplete to R.Smith.

2-10-SD42 (1:52) R.Dayne left guard to SD 37 for 5 yards (R.Godfrey).

PENALTY on SD-B.Leber, Defensive Offside, 5 yards, enforced at SD 42 - No Play.

2-5-SD37 (1:47) R.Dayne right guard to SD 34 for 3 yards (T.Kiel).

3-2-SD34 (1:02) R.Dayne left tackle to SD 33 for 1 yard (B.Leber).

4-1-SD33 57) R.Dayne left end to SD 23 for 10 yards (S.Foley).

1-10-SD23 10) J.Plummer pass incomplete.

2-10-SD23 09) J.Elam 41 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-M.Leach, Holder-T.Sauerbrun.

SD 17 DEN 20, Plays: 12 Yards: 57 Possession: 5:16.

You were saying?

It is also a fact that the Broncos organization is very high on Dayne. They believe he can be sucessful in Denver. When Buckhalter went down Philly contacted Denver about getting Dayne. Denvers response: They refused to even discuss it.

Not going to argue this. They probably wouldn't have traded Bell' date=' either. Doesn't mean he's going to be a starter this year. Heck, Tennessee refused to trade Billy Volek, too. McNair's still the starter, though. And I bet, if you asked nicely, San Diego would be hesitant to let Phillip Rivers go. And Green Bay wouldn't want to part ways with Aaron Rodgers. And Cincinatti would have no interest in dealing Chris Perry.

Now we have Ron Dayne moving up in the depth chart and Q being resigned. Obviously Shanny is not happy with the way things are "running" in Denver.

Is that obvious? I was thinking he was just more concerned about Bell's injury than he was letting on.

My guy? No one is my guy. If Anderson gets and stays healthy he will still lose carries to Dayne and either Bell or Q. If Anderson cant get healthy Dayne is the man but loses carries to Bell or Q. Either way there is not likely to be a "stud" in Denver this year.

I completely agree with this. If Anderson gets and stays healthy' date=' he will still lose carries. WELCOME TO THE NFL. Nobody gets all of his team's carries. Anderson could get 66% of his team's carries, and he'd still be in line for 300 total carries (20 carries a game from here on out), which is more carries than Anderson, Portis, or Portis had when they finished as top-5 fantasy backs in 2000, 2002, and 2003.

I think you're overthinking the losing carries angle. Denver runs enough that one back getting even 60% of the carries can make that guy very valuable.In 2004 Droughns carried the ball 275 times. Bell/Griffin/Hearst combined for 180 carries. Despite "losing" 40% of the carries, Droughns finished as the 13th ranked RB in my league.

If I can start a top 15 RB in my flex position in a 14 team league...

Thank you.

Priest Holmes is losing a third of his carries right now, and he's still a top 10 RB. Why? Well, because KC runs so much, and scores so many points per carry, that he still produces.

Now, replace Priest Holmes with Mike Anderson, and KC with Denver, and you've got Denver's rushing situation.

I don't know if you all missed the memo or something, but Denver is SECOND IN THE NFL in total RB carries over the past 3 seasons. There are more than enough carries to go around and still leave Anderson with his 20+ a game.

 

[SSOG]

Okay, SSOG, take off your orange colored glasses & listen carefully. This is what Shanahan is all about:

On the positive side, Shanahan has the respect of his peers as far as offensive scheming. I've heard HCs & DCs galore say for years that DEN is one of the hardest teams to prepare their D teams for because of the mismatches that Shanahan can create. Shanahan also has an incredibly uncanny knack for taking RBs out of nowhere & turning them into studs repeatedly. He coaches one of the best rushing attacks in NFL history with extremely low draft picks & other team's castoffs at RB. It's truly amazing how he does it year after year. I'll give him the nod here in both cases.

Now for the negative. Besides RBs & LBs (positions which have very similar required skill sets), and about a 50/50 position at O-line, Shanahan can't evaluate talent worth a damn. I'll offer up his drafts and his FA pickups as direct evidence. Shanahan drafts so poorly at all other positions that he has to go and pick up other team's throw aways to bolster his team. With his massive ego, he is firmly convinced that he can rehab & refresh any player that he picks up. So what we end up with in DEN is a mishmash of incapable young players meshed in with over-the-hill or attitude problem vets. That's a bad combination.

Shanahan caught lightning in a bottle one time. He inherited Elway, he uncovered his stud RB low in the draft in TD, and he struck gold with FA vets like McCaffrey, Romanowski, & Zimmerman. He threw that group together and for 3 years there was no better team in football. But he saw how that formula worked & has stuck to it (because of his massive ego) well after that spectacular team had the wheels come off the cart.

The problem with the formula is that for some odd reason - as good as a O mind that he is - he can't draft & develop a QB or a stud WR. I think his ego comes into play here too. He feels that he shouldn't have to develop these players - that they are men and they should take care of their own development. But these guys need some serious tutoring in the speed & schemes at the NFL level, as well as lessons in maturity, that Shanahan doesn't feel that he has to give them.

Then you add his attitude towards D-linemen - when they become successful & want more money he just casts them off because he is convinced that he can just draft another young stud or grab a vet off the junk pile (he did it with both Berry & Hayward, who they could really use) to fill in for these guys. And like he can't find a WR that develops into a #1 WR type in 10 years of trying, he can't find draft a CB and develop him either. He doesn't help the D backfield at all by constantly casting away premier pass rushers, putting mediocre or worse D-linemen out there and forcing the DBs to cover for extended periods.

What we end up with in Shanahan's formula are teams that are repeatedly mediocre. They are .500 teams that every other year manage to win a couple of more games than they lose, sneak into the playoffs as a wildcard, and then get massacred in the first round of the playoffs by legitimate playoff teams.

Shanahan's ego has convinced him that he can develop a championship team with this formula, and he refuses to look at the results of the past 6 years of evidence of his formula's failure. He refuses to admit that he could possibly be a crappy drafter, so we get year after year of kids coming in that can't possibly succeed at the NFL level. And this year's draft is proof positive of that. 3 CBs with significant warts & Clarett with his first 4 picks? That's freakin' terrible. So he brings in the CLE D-line, Dayne, & Terrell and figures that he can compete for a Superbowl yet again with this bunch of miscreants.

And the real problem is that his RB mojo might be wearing off. His last two "stud" RBs that he got out of the draft - Griffin & Bell - appear instead to be flops, 3rd down RBs at the very best. Picking up Dayne may save his #### this year, getting DEN back to around .500 once Dayne gets a chance to run full time.

Shanahan is an awful drafter, and he is just as bad at evaluating veteran talent at all positions besides RB, LB, and occasionally OL. He needs to recognize his weaknesses & give up control of the player movement. But with his massive ego he can't - he just can't. He has read his press clippings for way too long and is firmly convinced that he is indeed the "Mastermind". In the meantime, the rest of the league is laughing at him - and he can't hear it. And in the meantime, DEN will spend their time within a couple of games of .500, making the playoffs every once in a while & getting crushed in the first round by more talented teams. We'll keep seeing mediocre to terrible QB play, WR play, DL play, & CB play & then the next year he'll pick up a bunch of losers in the draft, have to pay them good rookie $$$, realize after offseason camps that they can't play, pick up mediocre to poor vets off of other team's cuts because he is hard against the cap & can't afford impact FAs, tell all the DEN believers like you out there that this year he has a SB team, and it will start all over again next year.

It's the same old merry-go-round, year after year. If that's what you want & you think is great to be a fan of - hey, more power to you. But I see the man behind the curtain, I have ceased to be impressed & realize that the SB years were the fluke instead of the past 6 years being the fluke, and I'd prefer to see the team suffer some setbacks for 3-4 years if that's what it takes to make them a legit SB contender again. This .500 +/- 2 games every year, year in & year out, with a gigantic dropping of trou in the first round of the playoffs every other year sucks. And it can be attributed to 1 man, and 1 man only - and his massive ego.

Like it or don't like it, that's the way it is my friend.

I'm not going to argue Shanahan with you in a Ron Dayne thread. If you want to start a new thread where we can continue this discussion, that's fine. My basic premise, though, is that Denver is one of the top 16 most talented teams. Why? Because they win more than they lose. So if a GM's job is compiling talent, and Denver is among the top 16 most talented teams, then Mike Shanahan is a top 16 GM.

 

[SrLimpio]

So you give props to a guess that is relentlessly supported even though the facts indicate the contrary? You admire a guy who calls a RB a stud after 7 points (in your league) in two games?Interesting.

No, it is not a guess, and no, it is not unsupported by facts. I'll go through it again for you, very slowly.

EDUCATED OPINION- Mike Anderson is the starting RB this year until he goes down to injury.

FACTS SUPPORTING THIS OPINION-

*Mike Shanahan has said Anderson is the starting RB.

*Mike Shanahan traditionally does NOT use a RBBC.

*Mike Shanahan gave Mike Anderson the majority of the carries last week.

*Mike Shanahan has demonstrated a reasonably long RB leash in the past.

*Ron Dayne has... what, 8 carries as a Bronco? I don't know if any of you take statistics, but funny things start happening when you have such a small sample size.

EDUCATED OPINION- Mike Anderson is a stud RB this year.

SUPPORT FOR THIS OPINION-

*As I already covered, Mike Anderson is the starting RB in Denver.

*Historically, Denver's starting RBs are top 10 on a PPG basis.

*As Yudkin wrote last offseason, Anderson has a history of uber-studness.

*As has been noted in this Yudkin article, Denver has finished as the 2nd, 4th, and 6th ranked RB scoring teams over the last 3 season. They're also 3rd in points per touch over that span.

Now, your opinion is that Ron Dayne will take over as a starter. I would LOOOOOVE to see the "facts" that make this an "opinion" instead of merely a shot-in-the-dark guess.

I can see that some admire his sticking to his guns. On this topic he can't support his position with facts and there are many indicators that oppose his assertion that he chooses to ignore. It is hard for me to stick up for anyone who only looks at what supports his position and ignores the rest.

Hey look, I just supported my position with facts! Now, please show me the indicators that oppose my assertion that I choose to ignore? So far, I have seen TWO "indicators".

1) Shanny says he's unsure how the carries will shake out.

Rebuttal- His top 2 RBs are both injured. I can understand WHY he would be unsure. He doesn't even know if Bell is going to be able to go, and it's hard to guess how carries will shake out if you don't even know who will be suiting up. He DOES, however, clearly state that Anderson is the starter... and we just have to look at history to see what the starter in Denver can be counted on for.

2) Ron Dayne ran the critical 4th-and-1.

Rebuttal- And Mike Anderson ran a 3rd-and-2 that was every bit as critical on the same drive. So if Shanny trusts Dayne over Anderson, why didn't Dayne run that play? I can think of a reason for pulling Anderson out if you trust him more- don't want to aggravate his injury with another 6 carries. I can NOT think of a reason for leaving Anderson in if you trust Dayne more (and are just going to go to him one play later, anyway).

So, as you can see, I am not "ignoring" those indicators. I am using my knowledge of the situation and my reasoning powers to explain why those "indicators" aren't really indicators that Dayne will become "The Man" at all.

Basically, I'm of the opinion that saying Dayne will win the starting RB job is exactly the same as saying Johnson will win the starting RB job. Both COULD happen, but neither have any basis in reality at the moment. Feel free to fire back with whatever other "indicators" I'm ignoring, though.

His assertion that Anderson will be a stud runningback this year is a guess at best.

Incorrect. Denver's RBs average the third most fantasy points per touch. Mike Anderson is the second best FF back this millenium when getting 20 touches a game (behind Faulk and ahead of Holmes). Saying Denver's starting RB is a stud is no more of a guess than saying that Priest Holmes is a stud. Yes, there's some uncertainty involved. That's why it's called "predicting the future" and not "reading the future". That said, I think there's plenty of evidence that supports my "prediction". I mean, if Bell had won the starting job in Denver, nobody would argue that he was a stud, right? Well, Anderson has proven himself a BETTER RB than Bell, so if Bell would have been a stud, then Anderson is even moreso.

He has not had a good game yet' date=' and while I realize many players have yet to perform up to expectations, none of the slow starting "studs" have the competittion Anderson does.[/quote']Denver has played 2 games against the 3-4 defense. Denver has historically struggled against the 3-4 defense. I actually PREDICTED a bad game for Denver's rushing attack against San Diego. I'm sure you'll all tell me that that was a lucky guess, too. Just like when I PREDICTED that Anderson would win the starting job outright. And when I PREDICTED that Dayne would become the primary backup. Those were all just lucky guesses, right? Well, even if they were, you still might want to listen to me, because it seems that I'm extremely lucky when it comes to guessing how Denver's rushing situation will work out.

Anderson is afflicted with a painful injury that will take awhile to heal. Obviously he can play though it' date=' but is it affecting his play? Did it cause the fumble at the 2? Was it the reason Anderson was out for the final game winning drive?[/quote']The answer to the first two questions is yes. The answer to the final question is HE WASN'T OUT FOR THE FINAL GAME WINNING DRIVE. HE CONVERTED A KEY THIRD-AND-TWO PLAY, WHICH DEMONSTRATES THAT THE COACHES STILL TRUST HIM IN BIG SITUATIONS.

From NFL.com-

1-10-DEN20 (5:21) J.Plummer pass incomplete to A.Lelie.

2-10-DEN20 (5:14) J.Plummer pass to C.Adams to DEN 28 for 8 yards (D.Florence).

3-2-DEN28 (4:34) M.Anderson up the middle to DEN 30 for 2 yards (D.Edwards).

1-10-DEN30 (3:52) J.Plummer pass incomplete to C.Adams.

PENALTY on SD-Q.Jammer, Defensive Pass Interference, 4 yards, enforced at DEN 30 - No Play.

1-10-DEN34 (3:48) R.Dayne left tackle to DEN 47 for 13 yards (T.Kiel).

1-10-DEN47 (3:12) R.Dayne left tackle to SD 45 for 8 yards (D.Scott).

2-2-SD45 (2:35) R.Dayne right guard to SD 42 for 3 yards (R.Godfrey).

1-10-SD42 (2:00) J.Plummer pass incomplete to R.Smith.

2-10-SD42 (1:52) R.Dayne left guard to SD 37 for 5 yards (R.Godfrey).

PENALTY on SD-B.Leber, Defensive Offside, 5 yards, enforced at SD 42 - No Play.

2-5-SD37 (1:47) R.Dayne right guard to SD 34 for 3 yards (T.Kiel).

3-2-SD34 (1:02) R.Dayne left tackle to SD 33 for 1 yard (B.Leber).

4-1-SD33 57) R.Dayne left end to SD 23 for 10 yards (S.Foley).

1-10-SD23 10) J.Plummer pass incomplete.

2-10-SD23 09) J.Elam 41 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-M.Leach, Holder-T.Sauerbrun.

SD 17 DEN 20, Plays: 12 Yards: 57 Possession: 5:16.

You were saying?

It is also a fact that the Broncos organization is very high on Dayne. They believe he can be sucessful in Denver. When Buckhalter went down Philly contacted Denver about getting Dayne. Denvers response: They refused to even discuss it.

Not going to argue this. They probably wouldn't have traded Bell' date=' either. Doesn't mean he's going to be a starter this year. Heck, Tennessee refused to trade Billy Volek, too. McNair's still the starter, though. And I bet, if you asked nicely, San Diego would be hesitant to let Phillip Rivers go. And Green Bay wouldn't want to part ways with Aaron Rodgers. And Cincinatti would have no interest in dealing Chris Perry.

Now we have Ron Dayne moving up in the depth chart and Q being resigned. Obviously Shanny is not happy with the way things are "running" in Denver.

Is that obvious? I was thinking he was just more concerned about Bell's injury than he was letting on.

My guy? No one is my guy. If Anderson gets and stays healthy he will still lose carries to Dayne and either Bell or Q. If Anderson cant get healthy Dayne is the man but loses carries to Bell or Q. Either way there is not likely to be a "stud" in Denver this year.

I completely agree with this. If Anderson gets and stays healthy' date=' he will still lose carries. WELCOME TO THE NFL. Nobody gets all of his team's carries. Anderson could get 66% of his team's carries, and he'd still be in line for 300 total carries (20 carries a game from here on out), which is more carries than Anderson, Portis, or Portis had when they finished as top-5 fantasy backs in 2000, 2002, and 2003.

I think you're overthinking the losing carries angle. Denver runs enough that one back getting even 60% of the carries can make that guy very valuable.In 2004 Droughns carried the ball 275 times. Bell/Griffin/Hearst combined for 180 carries. Despite "losing" 40% of the carries, Droughns finished as the 13th ranked RB in my league.

If I can start a top 15 RB in my flex position in a 14 team league...

Thank you.

Priest Holmes is losing a third of his carries right now, and he's still a top 10 RB. Why? Well, because KC runs so much, and scores so many points per carry, that he still produces.

Now, replace Priest Holmes with Mike Anderson, and KC with Denver, and you've got Denver's rushing situation.

I don't know if you all missed the memo or something, but Denver is SECOND IN THE NFL in total RB carries over the past 3 seasons. There are more than enough carries to go around and still leave Anderson with his 20+ a game.

You guys are like Tolstoy and Dostoevsky battling it out for longest posts ever.

BRAVO!

 

[j3r3m3y]

SSOG, if you are relying on historical data I submit that this Denver O-line is not the same as the Denver O-line you are used to. In addition, when Mike Anderson was getting 20 carries per game Denver have a MUCH better recieving corps and teams had to respect the pass, this is not the case currently.Historical data is a good tool to use, but don't let it overshadow what you see today. I see a Denver team who has had their run game shut down 2 of 2 times thus far. Once by Miami, who was a pre-season candidate for the worst team in the league.I don't care how many rushing champs they have produced in the past, they have yet to produce this year and there are reasons for it. Do you think any defense respects Plummer? Ashley? Rod is a good possesion guy but teams can, and will, stack against the run. They could not do that in the past.If you are going to compare Mike Anderson to Priest Holmes and Denvers O-line to KC's O-line as support.... well let me just say that I don't think they are comprable.And I am not saying that Dayne will be a stud, I am saying there is very good reason to believe Anderson wont be.

 

[P Boy]

My basic premise, though, is that Denver is one of the top 16 most talented teams. Why? Because they win more than they lose. So if a GM's job is compiling talent, and Denver is among the top 16 most talented teams, then Mike Shanahan is a top 16 GM.

Let's pretend I agree with you (which is arguable). What trophy is it exactly that the NFL hands out to the 16th best team in the NFL? Because by your logic & the results of the playoffs in the past 6 years, DEN is certainly no better than the 16th best team in the NFL.That makes DEN consistently MEDIOCRE.

 

[j3r3m3y]

My basic premise, though, is that Denver is one of the top 16 most talented teams. Why? Because they win more than they lose. So if a GM's job is compiling talent, and Denver is among the top 16 most talented teams, then Mike Shanahan is a top 16 GM.

Denver has been sucessful under Shanny due to players he inherited.And Top 16 is a play on words. They are also in the bottom 17 if your logic is valid (which I don't think it is).Remember, 50% of the population is of below average intelligence.

 

[SSOG]

SSOG, if you are relying on historical data I submit that this Denver O-line is not the same as the Denver O-line you are used to.

Last season, Denver's running game was 6th in the league. Their O-line, from left to right, was:

Matt Lepsis (first year at LT), Dan Neil (aging and injury prone), Tom Nalen, Ben Hamilton, George Foster (first year starting at any position in the NFL)

At the end of last season, Neil got injured, and Denver's O-line, from left to right, was:

Matt Lepsis (first year at LT), Cooper Carlisle (first start in NFL career), Tom Nalen, Ben Hamilton, George Foster (first year starting at any position in the NFL.

That, coincidentally enough, is Denver's O-line this season. Nalen is a year older, and a little bit less effective. I give you that. However, Hamilton is cleary in his prime, and Carlisle, Foster, and Lepsis all have a lot more experience at their respective positions. I wouldn't hesitate to say that Denver has a BETTER O-line this season than they did last season, when they only finished 6th in the entire NFL in fantasy points by RBs (despite starting their 5th stringer).

I would reply that Denver's O-line hasn't dropped off one bit. In fact, I think it was at its worst two seasons ago, and has improved for two straight years now.

In addition' date=' when Mike Anderson was getting 20 carries per game Denver have a MUCH better recieving corps and teams had to respect the pass, this is not the case currently.[/quote']Yes, Denver had a better 1-2 punch at WR. However, they also had Griese, who was immobile. Jake Plummer is a better fit for the offense, and his bootleg ability really opens up the running game. Not to mention the fact that Lelie is the best deep threat in the NFL (lead the NFL in ypc and TDs over 30 yards last year), which really backs off the safeties and opens running lanes more than Eddie Mac used to.

Historical data is a good tool to use' date=' but don't let it overshadow what you see today. I see a Denver team who has had their run game shut down 2 of 2 times thus far. Once by Miami, who was a pre-season candidate for the worst team in the league.[/quote']I see a Denver team whose struggles against the 3-4 have been well documented, and who faced two 3-4 defenses to open the season. I also see someone drawing waaaaay too many conclusions from a 2-game sample. Are you also convinced that Reggie Wayne isn't a top 30 WR this year, and that Baltimore's run game is a thing of the past?

I don't care how many rushing champs they have produced in the past' date=' they have yet to produce this year and there are reasons for it.[/quote']Yup. 3-4 defenses. Besides, Mike Anderson got more yards per carry against SD than Tomlinson got against Denver, and SD had a better run defense than Denver last year.

Do you think any defense respects Plummer? Ashley? Rod is a good possesion guy but teams can' date=' and will, stack against the run. They could not do that in the past.[/quote']Yes, I think defenses respect Plummer. He threw for 4000 yards last season. Yes, I think defenses respect Ashley. He averaged 20 yards per reception last year, and had 7 TDs of 30 yards or more- more than anyone in the NFL. I think a combination of Plummer being the best bootleg QB in the NFL (would be the second best if McNabb ran the bootleg more), and Ashley being the best deep threat in the NFL, is enough to keep ANYONE from stacking the box against Denver. If you want to know why, I can give you a very good Xs and Os description of how the threat of the bootleg keeps teams from playing the run.

If you are going to compare Mike Anderson to Priest Holmes and Denvers O-line to KC's O-line as support.... well let me just say that I don't think they are comprable.And I am not saying that Dayne will be a stud' date=' I am saying there is very good reason to believe Anderson wont be.

You're basing your opinion off of 2 games against a defensive scheme Denver has historically struggled against. I'm basing my opinion off of a comparison to 10 seasons of consecutive dominance. I think there's probably a little bit more evidence saying that Denver will have a top-10 rushing attack than there is saying that they won't. Especially since you still haven't addressed the fact that Denver is second in the NFL in rushing attempts over the last 3 years. Even if they regress in points per game, they'll be running the ball so much they'll still be studly.

Let's pretend I agree with you (which is arguable). What trophy is it exactly that the NFL hands out to the 16th best team in the NFL? Because by your logic & the results of the playoffs in the past 6 years, DEN is certainly no better than the 16th best team in the NFL.That makes DEN consistently MEDIOCRE.

Again, I never said that Shanny is a top 5 GM. I merely said he's top 50%, and I hardly call top 50% a "miserable failure".

Also, Denver certainly IS better than the 16th best team in the NFL. I'm sure if you look at their total wins and total playoff appearances over the past 5 seasons, they'll be above 16th in both categories. Top 5? Definitely not. I'm not arguing that they're the best in the league. I'm just arguing that I think Shanahan is perceived as a LOT worse of a GM than he really is.

 

[SSOG]

My basic premise, though, is that Denver is one of the top 16 most talented teams. Why? Because they win more than they lose. So if a GM's job is compiling talent, and Denver is among the top 16 most talented teams, then Mike Shanahan is a top 16 GM.

Denver has been sucessful under Shanny due to players he inherited.And Top 16 is a play on words. They are also in the bottom 17 if your logic is valid (which I don't think it is).

Remember, 50% of the population is of below average intelligence.

First off, Denver wasn't successful because of players he inherited. He inherited John Elway and Shannon Sharpe. That's pretty much it. Rod Smith, Eddie McCaffrey, Neil Smith, Gary Zimmerman, Terrell Davis, Mark Schlereth, Al Wilson, Trevor Pryce... all of these were Shanahan acquisitions.Second, I said top 16 because I don't think it can be argued that Shanny's in the top half of the league, not because I think he's 16th overall. So he's not "bottom 17". I suspect if you look at his wins, winning seasons, and playoff appearances over the past 5 years, he'll be top 10... or very close to it. I just said top 16 because it's hard to argue, and because it clearly refutes the opinion that Shanny is a "miserable failure" at GM.

 

[j3r3m3y]

SSOG- I don't have time to rsepond to the entirity of your post. You make some good points but some of what you say is just blind devotion.I did pull this section out because it is completely inaccurate:

Yes, Denver had a better 1-2 punch at WR. However, they also had Griese, who was immobile. Jake Plummer is a better fit for the offense, and his bootleg ability really opens up the running game. Not to mention the fact that Lelie is the best deep threat in the NFL (lead the NFL in ypc and TDs over 30 yards last year), which really backs off the safeties and opens running lanes more than Eddie Mac used to.

Sure he can scramble and open up the running game. Except that Shanny has told him specifically to stay in the pocket. So how well he can bootleg is irrelevant if he is instructed not to do it.And Ashley may have lead the league, but until he can consistantly catch the damn ball he is too inconsistant to be considered the "best" in any catagory.I like a good debate but you seem to be trying to use volume of information to compensate for a lack of validity.Cite stats from 5 years ago. Blame the poor rushing performances on a particular Defense. Keep touting Mike Anderson and good luck with your fantasy season.I am not convinced that Mike Anderson is or will be a "stud", there are too many variables to prclaim it as fact at this point.

 

[P Boy]

Here's the winning percentages of teams in the past 6 years (since Elway retired)Philadelphia Eagles 67%St. Louis Rams 67%Indianapolis Colts 66%Green Bay Packers 64%New England Patriots 64%Tennessee Titans 64%Pittsburgh Steelers 62%Baltimore Ravens 58%Denver Broncos 56%Miami Dolphins 56%Tampa Bay Buccaneers 56%New York Jets 54%Kansas City Chiefs 52%Oakland Raiders 52%Seattle Seahawks 52%Minnesota Vikings 51%Jacksonville Jaguars 49%New York Giants 48%Buffalo Bills 47%New Orleans Saints 47%Washington Redskins 46%Atlanta Falcons 43%Carolina Panthers 43%San Francisco 49ers 43%Chicago Bears 42%Dallas Cowboys 41%San Diego Chargers 40%Detroit Lions 34%Cincinnati Bengals 33%Houston Texans 33%Arizona Cardinals 32%Cleveland Browns 31%So by your argument, Shanahan is between the 9th best & 11th best HC/GM in the league.But if he's really that good, how do you explain this:Baltimore 21 Denver 3Indianapolis 41 Denver 10Indianapolis 49 Denver 24That's an 0-3 record and an average losing margin of 25 ppg in those playoff games since Elway retired.

 

[Banger]

Here's the winning percentages of teams in the past 6 years (since Elway retired)

Philadelphia Eagles 67%

St. Louis Rams 67%

Indianapolis Colts 66%

Green Bay Packers 64%

New England Patriots 64%

Tennessee Titans 64%

Pittsburgh Steelers 62%

Baltimore Ravens 58%

Denver Broncos 56%

Miami Dolphins 56%

Tampa Bay Buccaneers 56%

New York Jets 54%

Kansas City Chiefs 52%

Oakland Raiders 52%

Seattle Seahawks 52%

Minnesota Vikings 51%

Jacksonville Jaguars 49%

New York Giants 48%

Buffalo Bills 47%

New Orleans Saints 47%

Washington Redskins 46%

Atlanta Falcons 43%

Carolina Panthers 43%

San Francisco 49ers 43%

Chicago Bears 42%

Dallas Cowboys 41%

San Diego Chargers 40%

Detroit Lions 34%

Cincinnati Bengals 33%

Houston Texans 33%

Arizona Cardinals 32%

Cleveland Browns 31%

So by your argument, Shanahan is between the 9th best & 11th best HC/GM in the league.

But if he's really that good, how do you explain this:

Baltimore 21 Denver 3

Indianapolis 41 Denver 10

Indianapolis 49 Denver 24

That's an 0-3 record and an average losing margin of 25 ppg in those playoff games since Elway retired.

do they all play the 3-4 defense??

 

[j3r3m3y]

do they all play the 3-4 defense??

Good post.

 

[FFdork]

I tried to read every post in this thread but my wife finished War and Peace in the time I was sitting here, so forgive me if others have covered the same ground. The topic of this thread is "Ron Dayne to get bigger workload?" This is what I'm interested in, not all the stuff about Shanahan and/or devotion to Mike Anderson.I've been a Dayne hater, but I try to keep an open mind. When I've seen him in the Denver offense (e.g. did see the end of the San Diego game), it looks like a good fit for him. Unfortunately, I get distracted by following the teams I actually care about instead of watching the incredible drama that is the Denver RB rotation, so I haven't been able to watch every snap he (or Anderson or Bell) played .Can others who have seen more Denver football weigh in on how Dayne looks...preferably those who don't have an Anderson/Bell/Dayne axe to grind. He's obviously made an impression on some of the FBGs staff, but what did you think if you watched that entire San Diego game?

 

[j3r3m3y]

I tried to read every post in this thread but my wife finished War and Peace in the time I was sitting here, so forgive me if others have covered the same ground.

The topic of this thread is "Ron Dayne to get bigger workload?" This is what I'm interested in, not all the stuff about Shanahan and/or devotion to Mike Anderson.

I've been a Dayne hater, but I try to keep an open mind. When I've seen him in the Denver offense (e.g. did see the end of the San Diego game), it looks like a good fit for him. Unfortunately, I get distracted by following the teams I actually care about instead of watching the incredible drama that is the Denver RB rotation, so I haven't been able to watch every snap he (or Anderson or Bell) played .

Can others who have seen more Denver football weigh in on how Dayne looks...preferably those who don't have an Anderson/Bell/Dayne axe to grind. He's obviously made an impression on some of the FBGs staff, but what did you think if you watched that entire San Diego game?

I am not a Denver fan, but I live in the Denver area and am too cheap to get Direct TV. I have seen every snap of Denver football this year and here is my opinion on Dayne and Anderson strictly from what I sawayne just looked better, but he only ran 8 times. The only time I saw the O-line really open up a hole was for Dayne on a single play where he rushed for what? 12 yards?

Other than that both backs had to fight hard for every yard they gained. That being said I saw one of the two fumble at the 2 yardline, and later saw the other pick up a crucial 4th and 1 on a gimick toss to the outside.

Overall Dayne looked better on the one drive he was in than Anderson looked on any single drive he has played, but Dayne was only in for one drive so it might be too ealy to draw any concrete conclusions.

 

[SSOG]

SSOG- I don't have time to rsepond to the entirity of your post. You make some good points but some of what you say is just blind devotion.

I did pull this section out because it is completely inaccurate:

Yes, Denver had a better 1-2 punch at WR. However, they also had Griese, who was immobile. Jake Plummer is a better fit for the offense, and his bootleg ability really opens up the running game. Not to mention the fact that Lelie is the best deep threat in the NFL (lead the NFL in ypc and TDs over 30 yards last year), which really backs off the safeties and opens running lanes more than Eddie Mac used to.

Sure he can scramble and open up the running game. Except that Shanny has told him specifically to stay in the pocket. So how well he can bootleg is irrelevant if he is instructed not to do it.And Ashley may have lead the league, but until he can consistantly catch the damn ball he is too inconsistant to be considered the "best" in any catagory.

I like a good debate but you seem to be trying to use volume of information to compensate for a lack of validity.

Cite stats from 5 years ago. Blame the poor rushing performances on a particular Defense. Keep touting Mike Anderson and good luck with your fantasy season.

I am not convinced that Mike Anderson is or will be a "stud", there are too many variables to prclaim it as fact at this point.

No, Shanahan has NEVER told Plummer to stay in the pocket. Plummer's bootleg ability is one of the keys to Denver's offense. Denver's offense THRIVES off of the bootleg. It opens up the running game, it opens up the passing game. It is the single most important key to Denver's Offense. If the boot is successful, Denver's offense is successful. If teams keep outside contain and shut down the bootleg, then teams shut down Denver's offense. It's very simple.Ashley Lelie *is* the best deep threat in the NFL. He is rubbish on intermediate and underneath routes. I don't know if you're familiar with K.C. Joyner, the so-called "Football scientist". He watches every single snap of every single game. During each snap, he grades QBs, WRs, CBs... everything. He charts how frequently they get open against which types of coverages and which types of routes. Basically, he's done a lot more research on the subject than either you and I. And he called Ashley Lelie the scariest deep threat in the NFL. Unless you've watched every single WR in the NFL on every single snap in the NFL, I'm going to assume he's more of an expert on this than you.

Here, here's a link. Notice the picture of Lelie. Notice the caption that reads "According to KC Joyner's analysis, Broncos WR Ashley Lelie is the NFL's scariest deep threat."

I apologize, too, if I'm presenting a large volume of information. It's because I've done a lot of research on the subject, and there is a large volume of information that corroborates my position.

Here's the winning percentages of teams in the past 6 years (since Elway retired)

Philadelphia Eagles 67%

St. Louis Rams 67%

Indianapolis Colts 66%

Green Bay Packers 64%

New England Patriots 64%

Tennessee Titans 64%

Pittsburgh Steelers 62%

Baltimore Ravens 58%

Denver Broncos 56%

Miami Dolphins 56%

Tampa Bay Buccaneers 56%

New York Jets 54%

Kansas City Chiefs 52%

Oakland Raiders 52%

Seattle Seahawks 52%

Minnesota Vikings 51%

Jacksonville Jaguars 49%

New York Giants 48%

Buffalo Bills 47%

New Orleans Saints 47%

Washington Redskins 46%

Atlanta Falcons 43%

Carolina Panthers 43%

San Francisco 49ers 43%

Chicago Bears 42%

Dallas Cowboys 41%

San Diego Chargers 40%

Detroit Lions 34%

Cincinnati Bengals 33%

Houston Texans 33%

Arizona Cardinals 32%

Cleveland Browns 31%

So by your argument, Shanahan is between the 9th best & 11th best HC/GM in the league.

But if he's really that good, how do you explain this:

Baltimore 21 Denver 3

Indianapolis 41 Denver 10

Indianapolis 49 Denver 24

That's an 0-3 record and an average losing margin of 25 ppg in those playoff games since Elway retired.

Here's how I explain that. Denver- 9th. Baltimore- 8th. Indy- 3rd. Denver has faced more talented teams, and has been beaten. Oh what a shock. Again, I'm not claiming Shanny's top 5 here. I'm saying he's top 16 at the very least, and there's a strong arguement that he's top 10. And he's losing to teams that are top 5. No shock there.

I tried to read every post in this thread but my wife finished War and Peace in the time I was sitting here, so forgive me if others have covered the same ground.

The topic of this thread is "Ron Dayne to get bigger workload?" This is what I'm interested in, not all the stuff about Shanahan and/or devotion to Mike Anderson.

I've been a Dayne hater, but I try to keep an open mind. When I've seen him in the Denver offense (e.g. did see the end of the San Diego game), it looks like a good fit for him. Unfortunately, I get distracted by following the teams I actually care about instead of watching the incredible drama that is the Denver RB rotation, so I haven't been able to watch every snap he (or Anderson or Bell) played .

Can others who have seen more Denver football weigh in on how Dayne looks...preferably those who don't have an Anderson/Bell/Dayne axe to grind. He's obviously made an impression on some of the FBGs staff, but what did you think if you watched that entire San Diego game?

For the record, I don't have an Anderson/Bell/Dayne axe to grind. I was one of the first people to be high on Anderson, and I was one of the first people to be high on Dayne. I own both of them in almost every single one of my leagues.Yes, Dayne looked good, but it's so hard to judge an RB on a limited number of carries playing against a tired defense. I just can't compare Dayne to Anderson based on their regular season work, because neither has HAD much regular season work. I can judge Dayne based on his TC and Preseason work, though, and I feel confident saying that if he is starting for Denver, he is a fantasy stud. He works well with the system. He does everything a Denver RB needs to do to be successful.

 

[P Boy]

Here's how I explain that. Denver- 9th. Baltimore- 8th. Indy- 3rd. Denver has faced more talented teams, and has been beaten. Oh what a shock. Again, I'm not claiming Shanny's top 5 here. I'm saying he's top 16 at the very least, and there's a strong arguement that he's top 10. And he's losing to teams that are top 5. No shock there.

Man, you have an orange coated excuse for everything, don't you?Oh what a shock? THEY GOT BEATEN BY AN AVERAGE OF 25 POINTS PER GAME! THE CLOSEST THEY HAVE GOTTEN TO ANY OPPONENT IN THOSE GAMES WAS 18 POINTS!

Almost any team in the league could have gone into IND the past 2 years and kept it closer than 31 & 25 point loses.

C'mon. This is freakin' ridiculous.

 

[SSOG]

Here's how I explain that. Denver- 9th. Baltimore- 8th. Indy- 3rd. Denver has faced more talented teams, and has been beaten. Oh what a shock. Again, I'm not claiming Shanny's top 5 here. I'm saying he's top 16 at the very least, and there's a strong arguement that he's top 10. And he's losing to teams that are top 5. No shock there.

Man, you have an orange coated excuse for everything, don't you?Oh what a shock? THEY GOT BEATEN BY AN AVERAGE OF 25 POINTS PER GAME! THE CLOSEST THEY HAVE GOTTEN TO ANY OPPONENT IN THOSE GAMES WAS 18 POINTS!

Almost any team in the league could have gone into IND the past 2 years and kept it closer than 31 & 25 point loses.

C'mon. This is freakin' ridiculous.

No, there are other reasons behind the losses, but would you argue that Baltimore and Indy have been better teams the years that Denver lost to them?There could have been all sorts of reasons for the margin of victory, not the least of which is the ever-present "too small sample size" issue. Look at Indy vs. NE. Would you say that Indy's GM is one of the worst in the league because Indy keeps getting shellacked by NE? Besides, wouldn't large playoff losses be more of a criticism against the coach than it is against the talent (and therefore, the GM)?

Denver is 2-0 against Indy in the regular season over the last two years. That suggests to me that Denver has enough talent to compete with Indy (and that Indy really didn't care about the game last year). Denver lost by a combined 56 points when it mattered to this same Indy team it demonstrated an ability to compete with. That suggests poor coaching to me more than it suggests poor GMing.

Again, I'm not trying to make the claim that Shanahan is a top 5 GM here. I'm not trying to claim that Denver is the best team in the league, and I'm certainly not making excuses for losing back-to-back years to Indy. I'm simply saying that anyone who calls Shanahan a "failure" as a GM is terribly misguided. It is very clear to me that he is AT THE LEAST in the top 50%. Personally, I think he's possibly even top 10.

Also, for the record, I'm a firm believer in Shanahan's way of going about business. Keep your team competitive every season and hope to catch lightning in a bottle. It's also the way that Cowher and Rooney run their franchise. They just try to have a good team every year and let everything sort itself out from there. The result? Rooney extends Cowher's contract after a 6-10 season. The outcome? 15-1 and an appearance in the AFC championship game.

I think a lot of the NFL comes down to a few bad bounces or a few lucky breaks. **** Vermeil has done a lot of research on "great" teams and found that the overwhelming majority of the time, the "best" team was really just the one that faced the easiest schedule. For instance, in the season his Rams won the SB, he only faced one team with a winning record (or maybe it was only one playoff team, I forget exactly), and they lost to it. He just assembled a good team, lucked into a great schedule, caught lightning in a bottle, and rode it to the superbowl.

I would rather be competitive every single season and hope that one year we're going to get the breaks that separate a 12-4 team from a 10-6 team. But that's just me. That has nothing to do with the topic at hand- which is that Shanahan is a much better GM than *ANYONE* gives him credit for. And the numbers support it.

 

[P Boy]

Also, for the record, I'm a firm believer in Shanahan's way of going about business.

I hadn't noticed. I thought maybe you were his caddy, or his valet, or his ...awww, nevermind.

 

[Bears_Man2]

Yes, Dayne looked good, but it's so hard to judge an RB on a limited number of carries playing against a tired defense.

I'm having flashbacks to watching Troy Hambrick in Dallas behind Emmitt.....and remembering how gooded he looked in relief.

 

[SSOG]

Also, for the record, I'm a firm believer in Shanahan's way of going about business.

I hadn't noticed.

I thought maybe you were his caddy, or his valet, or his ...

awww, nevermind.

I'll apologize that I don't fall for the media's knee-jerk negative reaction to everything he does. Like I said, Cowher went 6-10 in Steel town and Rooney gave him a contract extension and the fans were IRATE about it. They were ready to run him out of town with pitchforks. And then Cowher went 15-1, and they've all forgotten just how bad of a coach they really thought he was. Just because Shanny hasn't done anything spectacular lately doesn't mean he's not a good head coach.I challenge you to name 10 coaches you'd rather have than Shanahan. My list consists of Bellichick, Reid, Parcells... and now it starts getting tough. Possibly Vermeil, maybe sort of. Denny Green? Another possibility. Dungy? I could see that. Fisher, no way. Cowher? Hmmm... possibly. Marvin Lewis? I'd like to see more, first. Ditto that for Lovie Smith. Those are all the names I can think of that I'd even consider. Three that are clearly better (or "tier 1" coaches, if you will), and then 6 that are sort of lumped in with him (or "tier 2" coaches, if you will).

I challenge you to name 10 teams that you think have better general management than Denver. Indy, New England, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, Philadelphia, no question. Tennessee? Good at the draft, bad at the cap. And here's where I start drawing a blank.

So again, I claim that Denver is top 10 in coaching and top 10 in GMing. And... what do you know? They're also top 10 in terms of winning percentage! Funny how that works out, huh? Disagree all you want, but I think it's definitely a SERIOUS stretch to call Shanahan a "miserable" failure. I can name at least 20 teams that wish they were "failing" as bad as Denver right now. Only 3 playoff appearances in the past 5 seasons. And they even had a losing season 6 years ago! Heaven forbid.

 

[chedha]

Ashley Lelie *is* the best deep threat in the NFL. He is rubbish on intermediate and underneath routes. I don't know if you're familiar with K.C. Joyner, the so-called "Football scientist". He watches every single snap of every single game. During each snap, he grades QBs, WRs, CBs... everything. He charts how frequently they get open against which types of coverages and which types of routes. Basically, he's done a lot more research on the subject than either you and I. And he called Ashley Lelie the scariest deep threat in the NFL. Unless you've watched every single WR in the NFL on every single snap in the NFL, I'm going to assume he's more of an expert on this than you.

Here, here's a link. Notice the picture of Lelie. Notice the caption that reads "According to KC Joyner's analysis, Broncos WR Ashley Lelie is the NFL's scariest deep threat."

It says in the article that Lelie was the best deep threat last year, which based on the numbers would be accurate. But I know your not saying that lelie is a better deep threat than Moss or Owens are you? Please tell me your not saying that..

 

[SSOG]

It says in the article that Lelie was the best deep threat last year, which based on the numbers would be accurate. But I know your not saying that lelie is a better deep threat than Moss or Owens are you? Please tell me your not saying that..

Lelie had more long catches, and a higher per-catch average, than both Moss and Owens. Lelie is not nearly as good of a red-zone target as Moss and Owens. Lelie is not as good after the catch as Moss and Owens. Lelie is absolutely abysmal on short and intermediate routes. But yes, last season, Lelie was more dangerous on deep routes than Moss or Owens. Meaning if you had to pick one guy in the NFL to throw a 40 yard pass play to, last season that guy would be Lelie. At least, according to a guy who charted the success of every single WR against every single CB on every single snap.Will that be the case again this season? I dunno, we'll have to see. I could make the arguement that Owens and Moss have never been a better deep threat than Lelie in his prime, but that would just be asinine.

Actually, I can say with conviction that Lelie is a better deep threat than Owens. Owens' strength isn't his deep routes, or his verticle. It's his size, strength, and after-the-catch skills. Nobody in the NFL is better at taking a 10 yard curl 70 yards for a score than Owens. But if you had to pick guys to throw a jump ball to 40 yards downfield, Owens probably wouldn't be in the top 10.

So back to the question. Do I think Lelie will be better than Moss purely on deep routes this season? Possibly, let's see how it plays out. Do I think Lelie is a better receiver than Moss? Of course not. He's not even the best receiver on his own team.

 

[Banger]

It says in the article that Lelie was the best deep threat last year, which based on the numbers would be accurate. But I know your not saying that lelie is a better deep threat than Moss or Owens are you? Please tell me your not saying that..

Lelie had more long catches, and a higher per-catch average, than both Moss and Owens. Lelie is not nearly as good of a red-zone target as Moss and Owens. Lelie is not as good after the catch as Moss and Owens. Lelie is absolutely abysmal on short and intermediate routes. But yes, last season, Lelie was more dangerous on deep routes than Moss or Owens. Meaning if you had to pick one guy in the NFL to throw a 40 yard pass play to, last season that guy would be Lelie. At least, according to a guy who charted the success of every single WR against every single CB on every single snap.Will that be the case again this season? I dunno, we'll have to see. I could make the arguement that Owens and Moss have never been a better deep threat than Lelie in his prime, but that would just be asinine.

Actually, I can say with conviction that Lelie is a better deep threat than Owens. Owens' strength isn't his deep routes, or his verticle. It's his size, strength, and after-the-catch skills. Nobody in the NFL is better at taking a 10 yard curl 70 yards for a score than Owens. But if you had to pick guys to throw a jump ball to 40 yards downfield, Owens probably wouldn't be in the top 10.

So back to the question. Do I think Lelie will be better than Moss purely on deep routes this season? Possibly, let's see how it plays out. Do I think Lelie is a better receiver than Moss? Of course not. He's not even the best receiver on his own team.

you are funny.

 

[P Boy]

Actually, I can say with conviction that Lelie is a better deep threat than Owens.

Yeah, we saw that in the MIA game. Lelie was just spectacular as a deep threat when he broke off one route after Plummer threw the ball that would have been an easy TD early in the game, and another long pass where he was open & flat out dropped the football.I've seen orange blinders Broncos fans before, but never one as jaded as you are.Keep up the good work. This board needs more humor.

 

[Raiders Fan]

It says in the article that Lelie was the best deep threat last year, which based on the numbers would be accurate. But I know your not saying that lelie is a better deep threat than Moss or Owens are you? Please tell me your not saying that..

Lelie had more long catches, and a higher per-catch average, than both Moss and Owens. Lelie is not nearly as good of a red-zone target as Moss and Owens. Lelie is not as good after the catch as Moss and Owens. Lelie is absolutely abysmal on short and intermediate routes. But yes, last season, Lelie was more dangerous on deep routes than Moss or Owens. Meaning if you had to pick one guy in the NFL to throw a 40 yard pass play to, last season that guy would be Lelie. At least, according to a guy who charted the success of every single WR against every single CB on every single snap.Will that be the case again this season? I dunno, we'll have to see. I could make the arguement that Owens and Moss have never been a better deep threat than Lelie in his prime, but that would just be asinine.

Actually, I can say with conviction that Lelie is a better deep threat than Owens. Owens' strength isn't his deep routes, or his verticle. It's his size, strength, and after-the-catch skills. Nobody in the NFL is better at taking a 10 yard curl 70 yards for a score than Owens. But if you had to pick guys to throw a jump ball to 40 yards downfield, Owens probably wouldn't be in the top 10.

So back to the question. Do I think Lelie will be better than Moss purely on deep routes this season? Possibly, let's see how it plays out. Do I think Lelie is a better receiver than Moss? Of course not. He's not even the best receiver on his own team.

So you would draft Lelie ahead of Owens and Moss?? If you would can I join your league??

 

[djjosee]

Why do I keep on coming back to this thread thinking there will be some Dayne talk?

 

[P Boy]

Why do I keep on coming back to this thread thinking there will be some Dayne talk?   

I think the Dayne issue is pretty well talked out. It pretty much comes out like this:SSOG: Mike Anderson starts for the rest of the season, even if he is killed by a bus walking across the street tomorrow.

Rest of the board: No clue who is going to be the #1 RB in DEN. Anderson has an edge, but also a nagging injury & some questionable production as well as a fumble. Dayne has very good production in very limited but very critical carries. Bell is quickly fading from veiw with very spotty production & an ankle injury to boot. Griffin has been brought back but has proven he is a turd even in DEN.

 

[AeroFANatic]

Anderson is good for 20 touches this week as he eases his way back to his preseason form. He knows Dayne is breathing down his neck, and as any Marine will tell you...that is a challenge.I *fully* expect a good game from Anderson under the MNF lights to put a stamp on his #1 status.Anderson = 20 touchesDayne = 7-9 touchesBell = 3-5 touchesIf Anderson is ineffective, or loses another fumble....Dayne's workload will increase starting next week...to a 50/50 split with Anderson.

 

[chedha]

Why do I keep on coming back to this thread thinking there will be some Dayne talk?    

I think the Dayne issue is pretty well talked out. It pretty much comes out like this:SSOG: Mike Anderson starts for the rest of the season, even if he is killed by a bus walking across the street tomorrow.

Rest of the board: No clue who is going to be the #1 RB in DEN. Anderson has an edge, but also a nagging injury & some questionable production as well as a fumble. Dayne has very good production in very limited but very critical carries. Bell is quickly fading from veiw with very spotty production & an ankle injury to boot. Griffin has been brought back but has proven he is a turd even in DEN.

I wouldn't knock the guy because he's confident in a particular player.. At least he's bold enough to come out and make a statement with confidence, instead of everyone else who's staying away from the situation because of the uncertainty. He thinks Anderson is the guy, Shanny has said Anderson is the guy, so I don't see how he's so out of line with what how he views that situation. The info you provided on the other guys (dayne/bell) is true, but how much of an impact that has on Anderson's role as the starter is pure speculation. Most of us will take the wait and see approach with the Den. backfield, but if he wants to come out and say Anderson is an every week starter and is a top 10 back, I think that's a bold yet risky projection..BTW.. when he says Lelie>Moss potentially this year, is just ridiculous..

 

[ScoobyDoo]

I honestly don't see Bell touching the football this week.

 

[CalBear]

It says in the article that Lelie was the best deep threat last year, which based on the numbers would be accurate. But I know your not saying that lelie is a better deep threat than Moss or Owens are you? Please tell me your not saying that..

Lelie had more long catches, and a higher per-catch average, than both Moss and Owens. Lelie is not nearly as good of a red-zone target as Moss and Owens. Lelie is not as good after the catch as Moss and Owens. Lelie is absolutely abysmal on short and intermediate routes. But yes, last season, Lelie was more dangerous on deep routes than Moss or Owens. Meaning if you had to pick one guy in the NFL to throw a 40 yard pass play to, last season that guy would be Lelie. At least, according to a guy who charted the success of every single WR against every single CB on every single snap.

How many 40 yard pass plays is that? A tiny number. You're looking at tiny sample sizes. As long as we're doing that, let's point out that in 23 targets so far this year, Lelie's longest reception is 16 yards. So obviously Steve Heiden is a much better big-play threat.

 

[j3r3m3y]

If Anderson is ineffective, or loses another fumble....Dayne's workload will increase starting next week...to a 50/50 split with Anderson.

I agree with your assesment up to this point.Shanny is not known for splitting carries other than to reduce workload on one back. He always uses a primary.

If Anderson stinks up the joint or loses a fumble I see Dayne as the starter with "We want to give Mike a chance to fully heal his ribs" as the reason.

 

[j3r3m3y]

How many 40 yard pass plays is that? A tiny number. You're looking at tiny sample sizes. As long as we're doing that, let's point out that in 23 targets so far this year, Lelie's longest reception is 16 yards. So obviously Steve Heiden is a much better big-play threat.

 

[SuperJohn96]

This is one of my favourite threads of the season so far.All I know is there better be a sig bet or something in here...somebody has got to eat crow when this has all played out.

 

[Paper Lions]

Actually, I can say with conviction that Lelie is a better deep threat than Owens.

BTW, I can say with conviction that Donald Trump's hair is stylish, but that doesn't mean it's true.

 

[SSOG]

Actually, I can say with conviction that Lelie is a better deep threat than Owens.

Yeah, we saw that in the MIA game. Lelie was just spectacular as a deep threat when he broke off one route after Plummer threw the ball that would have been an easy TD early in the game, and another long pass where he was open & flat out dropped the football.I've seen orange blinders Broncos fans before, but never one as jaded as you are.

Keep up the good work. This board needs more humor.

Yeah, we all saw that Oakland game last season, where Champ Bailey got burned by Jerry Porter. I completely agree that all conclusions drawn from a single game are fully valid, so yes, Dayne is a better RB than Anderson, and Champ Bailey is the worst CB in the NFL.

So you would draft Lelie ahead of Owens and Moss?? If you would can I join your league??

Riiiiight... where did I say that, again? Was it where I said that Lelie wasn't even the best WR on his own team? Or maybe it was when I was mentioning how the only thing Lelie is good for is running 40 yards downfield and going up for the ball.If my fantasy league only counted receptions that traveled 40 yards through the air, then I would be tempted to draft Lelie over Moss and Owens. Surprisingly, I have yet to encounter a league with that scoring system. That might explain why I never even drafted Lelie over Rod Smith.

If Anderson is ineffective, or loses another fumble....Dayne's workload will increase starting next week...to a 50/50 split with Anderson.

I agree with your assesment up to this point.Shanny is not known for splitting carries other than to reduce workload on one back. He always uses a primary.

If Anderson stinks up the joint or loses a fumble I see Dayne as the starter with "We want to give Mike a chance to fully heal his ribs" as the reason.

Beaten to the punch. I was going to post just this.If Shanny decides to give Dayne a shot, he won't split their carries 50/50. He'll name Dayne the starter and give him the bulk. See Droughns, Reuben, 2004.

I wouldn't knock the guy because he's confident in a particular player.. At least he's bold enough to come out and make a statement with confidence, instead of everyone else who's staying away from the situation because of the uncertainty. He thinks Anderson is the guy, Shanny has said Anderson is the guy, so I don't see how he's so out of line with what how he views that situation. The info you provided on the other guys (dayne/bell) is true, but how much of an impact that has on Anderson's role as the starter is pure speculation. Most of us will take the wait and see approach with the Den. backfield, but if he wants to come out and say Anderson is an every week starter and is a top 10 back, I think that's a bold yet risky projection..

BTW.. when he says Lelie>Moss potentially this year, is just ridiculous..

Thank you for the support. As I said, nobody's jumping on my back when I say Holmes is a top 10 back, despite the presence of a capable backup and the fact he'll be sharing carries. So why are they getting on me when I say that Anderson will be a top 10 back, despite the presence of a capable backup and the fact he'll be sharing carries?As for that last part... please people. Read. Comprehend. Post. IN THAT ORDER. Notice where I said that Lelie isn't even as good as Rod Smith? Notice where I said that Lelie is absolute rubbish on anything except deep balls? I think that Lelie is potentially better than Moss at catching balls that have traveled 40 yards through the air. I don't think he'll get more 40+ yard receptions, because I think Moss's after-the-catch skills will turn a lot of 10-20 yarders into 40-60 yarders. I think he has the potential to outproduce Moss on balls that are thrown 40 yards downfield, AND THAT'S IT. That is the only category that I could concievably see Lelie outproducing either Moss or Owens in.

Once again... step 1- read. Step 2- comprehend. Step 3- reply.

This is one of my favourite threads of the season so far.

All I know is there better be a sig bet or something in here...somebody has got to eat crow when this has all played out.

I've made my stance clear, and I know if I'm wrong I'll be feasting on crow. For some reason, though, I haven't seen anyone other than Knowledge Reigns Supreme step out on a limb and make an actual prediction. I get ridiculed a lot, but I don't really see anyone else stepping forward and offering a more valid theory. I just see a lot of people saying "Oh, hahaha, you're stupid if you try and predict this situation because it's hard!"Do you guys make fun of FBGs, too, when they release their offseason predictions? I mean, they make some pretty tough predictions, too. I'm sure the Denver situation wasn't any easier to predict back when they did it, but nobody seems to be making fun of them for going out on a limb and predicting it.

Actually, I can say with conviction that Lelie is a better deep threat than Owens.

BTW, I can say with conviction that Donald Trump's hair is stylish, but that doesn't mean it's true.

Ummm... have you watched Owens play? His entire game is based on outmuscling the competition and yards after the catch. He leads the league in yards after the catch over the past 5 seasons. You will occasionally see his team throw it to him deep, but it's very uncommon. The majority of his receptions- even his long receptions- are between 10 and 20 yard routes that he just breaks tackles and takes a lot further.I can say with conviction that Rod Smith is a better blocker than Owens, too. And so is Keyshawn Johnson, and so is Hines Ward, and so is Plaxico Burress. And Eddie McCaffrey was, too. And it doesn't make Owens any less of a receiver. Every WR is going to have strengths and weaknesses in their game, and Owens and Moss are no different. Moss runs indifferent routes over the middle. Owens isn't as good on deep routes. Both are too much of a prima donna to really stick their nose in the thick of it blocking. Doesn't mean they aren't both great receivers. I have them as a tier unto themselves among fantasy WRs this year (and so does FBGs, based on the most recent top 200 forward).

Come on, people. It's okay to admit that the best WRs aren't the absolute best in the league at absolutely everything. Owens also short-arms a lot of balls, and has a bad case of the dropsies. I doubt he even has the best hands on his own team (Brian Westbrook). I doubt he's top-20 in the NFL, as far as hands are concerned.

You all can feel free to make fun of me for saying that, too. Go ahead. I should mention, though, that Owens lead the league in dropped passes 2 seasons ago.

 

[P Boy]

Ummm... have you watched Owens play? His entire game is based on outmuscling the competition and yards after the catch. He leads the league in yards after the catch over the past 5 seasons. You will occasionally see his team throw it to him deep, but it's very uncommon. The majority of his receptions- even his long receptions- are between 10 and 20 yard routes that he just breaks tackles and takes a lot further.

Uh, yes, I would say that many here have actually seen Owens play, and have seen him behind the secondary on more than a few long plays.Thanks for the lecture, though.

 

[The Donald]

Actually, I can say with conviction that Lelie is a better deep threat than Owens.

BTW, I can say with conviction that Donald Trump's hair is stylish, but that doesn't mean it's true.

 

[SSOG]

Ummm... have you watched Owens play? His entire game is based on outmuscling the competition and yards after the catch. He leads the league in yards after the catch over the past 5 seasons. You will occasionally see his team throw it to him deep, but it's very uncommon. The majority of his receptions- even his long receptions- are between 10 and 20 yard routes that he just breaks tackles and takes a lot further.

Uh, yes, I would say that many here have actually seen Owens play, and have seen him behind the secondary on more than a few long plays.

Thanks for the lecture, though.

I've seen Rod Smith behind the secondary on more than a few long plays, too. Doesn't mean they were deep plays, just means they were plays where he got behind the secondary. I mean, if he's getting behind the secondary 40 yards down the field, that's one thing (I haven't seen Owens do it). If he's getting behind the secondary 20 yards downfield and then outrunning the secondary for a score, that's another (I see Owens do that all the time. Rod Smith, too).Denver's two longest TD passes last season both went to Rod Smith. Is he a better deep threat than Ashley Lelie, then?

 

[Paper Lions]

Actually, I can say with conviction that Lelie is a better deep threat than Owens.

BTW, I can say with conviction that Donald Trump's hair is stylish, but that doesn't mean it's true.

LOL.It doesn't mean its not true either GB.

 

[chedha]

Notice where I said that Lelie isn't even as good as Rod Smith? Notice where I said that Lelie is absolute rubbish on anything except deep balls? I think that Lelie is potentially better than Moss at catching balls that have traveled 40 yards through the air. I don't think he'll get more 40+ yard receptions, because I think Moss's after-the-catch skills will turn a lot of 10-20 yarders into 40-60 yarders. I think he has the potential to outproduce Moss on balls that are thrown 40 yards downfield, AND THAT'S IT. That is the only category that I could concievably see Lelie outproducing either Moss or Owens in.

Once again... step 1- read. Step 2- comprehend. Step 3- reply.

I understand what your saying and I'm not going to go into too much detail on this as, this is a Dayne thread that's gone way off topic. But I was responding to your original post regarding lelie. You may want to read your own posts before you start giving reading lessons..Remember this?

Ashley Lelie *is* the best deep threat in the NFL. He is rubbish on intermediate and underneath routes. I don't know if you're familiar with K.C. Joyner, the so-called "Football scientist". He watches every single snap of every single game. During each snap, he grades QBs, WRs, CBs... everything. He charts how frequently they get open against which types of coverages and which types of routes. Basically, he's done a lot more research on the subject than either you and I. And he called Ashley Lelie the scariest deep threat in the NFL. Unless you've watched every single WR in the NFL on every single snap in the NFL, I'm going to assume he's more of an expert on this than you.

Here, here's a link. Notice the picture of Lelie. Notice the caption that reads "According to KC Joyner's analysis, Broncos WR Ashley Lelie is the NFL's scariest deep threat."

No where in that post, did you mention lelie is better at catching passes 40yds+, than moss or owens. Also, no where in the ARTICLE does it mention lelie is better than anyone else at catching long balls.. It says that Lelie was possibly the most dangerous deep threat in the NFL last season, which was based on his YPC. So, do you think if shanny had a choice between lelie or moss/owens to have, strictly as a deep ball reciever, do you think he'd chose lelie? I'm talking STRICTLY as a 40yds plus reciever? I don't think so... I don't care how bad his reputation is as a GM..

 

[Lauryn]

i was wondering how in the world there could be 5 pages of discussion on ron dayne...now i see what happened.

 

[Paper Lions]

i was wondering how in the world there could be 5 pages of discussion on ron dayne...now i see what happened.

Hi Lauryn. Any new music coming out?

 

[Paper Lions]

As for that last part... please people. Read. Comprehend. Post. IN THAT ORDER. Notice where I said that Lelie isn't even as good as Rod Smith? Notice where I said that Lelie is absolute rubbish on anything except deep balls? I think that Lelie is potentially better than Moss at catching balls that have traveled 40 yards through the air. I don't think he'll get more 40+ yard receptions, because I think Moss's after-the-catch skills will turn a lot of 10-20 yarders into 40-60 yarders. I think he has the potential to outproduce Moss on balls that are thrown 40 yards downfield, AND THAT'S IT. That is the only category that I could concievably see Lelie outproducing either Moss or Owens in.

Once again... step 1- read. Step 2- comprehend. Step 3- reply.

I highly doubt this will happen, but if at any point you get to wondering why it seems as if people on these boards don't like you, here's my suggestion:Sit down with your wife/girlfriend/mom/dad/brother/whomever and have them read this thread and your responses herein. Then have them give you an opinion as to how you are coming off.

 

[SSOG]

No where in that post, did you mention lelie is better at catching passes 40yds+, than moss or owens. Also, no where in the ARTICLE does it mention lelie is better than anyone else at catching long balls.. It says that Lelie was possibly the most dangerous deep threat in the NFL last season, which was based on his YPC.

So, do you think if shanny had a choice between lelie or moss/owens to have, strictly as a deep ball reciever, do you think he'd chose lelie? I'm talking STRICTLY as a 40yds plus reciever? I don't think so... I don't care how bad his reputation is as a GM..

Actually, it wasn't based on his YPC. It was based on somebody who watched every snap of every game, and said "Okay, Lelie ran a deep route x amount of times, and converted y times against z amount of good coverages. Therefore, Lelie was the most successful WR in the NFL on deep plays".And do I think Shanny would choose Lelie over Moss strictly as a 40+ yard receiver? Probably not. Do I think that Shanny would choose Lelie over Owens strictly as a 40+ yard receiver? I would think almost certainly. Owens isn't that fast, as far as NFL receivers go, and the deep game definitely isn't his strength. Owens is a great YAC receiver, but limiting him to nothing but the deep ball would be a gross misuse of his talents, and would turn him into a much more normal WR.

Please, guys, I'm not disrespecting Terrel Owens. I think Owens is one of the best receivers in this league, by far. He's just not one of the best deep threats in the league. He also doesn't have the best hands in the league. You know what? Marvin Harrison doesn't have the best after-the-catch skills, but I still think he's one of the best WRs in the league. I wouldn't take him as a deep receiver over Lelie, either.

I highly doubt this will happen, but if at any point you get to wondering why it seems as if people on these boards don't like you, here's my suggestion:

Sit down with your wife/girlfriend/mom/dad/brother/whomever and have them read this thread and your responses herein. Then have them give you an opinion as to how you are coming off.

I'm already a step ahead of you. A league-mate of mine, who has lurked here for years but rarely posts, read the threads and almost broke his silence because he was so pissed off that people were jumping all over me for making predictions about the NFL on a message board that's part of a web site whose only reason for existing is predicting the NFL. In the meantime, have you had a wife/girlfriend/mom/dad/brother/whomever read over your posts?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Please, guys, I'm not disrespecting Terrel Owens. I think Owens is one of the best receivers in this league, by far. He's just not one of the best deep threats in the league. He also doesn't have the best hands in the league. You know what? Marvin Harrison doesn't have the best after-the-catch skills, but I still think he's one of the best WRs in the league. I wouldn't take him as a deep receiver over Lelie, either.

What?You wouldn't take "who" as a deep threat over "who"?You need to get out of the business of touting some meaningless "deep" receiver statistic to prop up a receiver that can't hold the jockstrap of either Moss, Harrison, or Owens.I'll take all 3 of those guys and about two dozen more as a "deep" threat over Ashley Lelie.

 

[chedha]

I'm already a step ahead of you. A league-mate of mine, who has lurked here for years but rarely posts, read the threads and almost broke his silence because he was so pissed off that people were jumping all over me for making predictions about the NFL on a message board that's part of a web site whose only reason for existing is predicting the NFL. In the meantime, have you had a wife/girlfriend/mom/dad/brother/whomever read over your posts?

I don't think people have a problem with you making predictions. I think people may have a problem with the tone in your posts, which people could interpret to be arrogant or condescending.. Another thing is, you are taking a firm stance about a situation that no one else is willing to. The Den RB situation appears to be very cloudy, so when you come out and say "Mike Anderson is a stud", "Mike Anderson will be a top 10 guy this year", people will jump on you because they are not willing to take the same stance, for fear that their posts will be bumped and they'll be ridiculed and made fun of..

 

[P Boy]

they are not willing to take the same stance, for fear that their posts will be bumped and they'll be ridiculed and made fun of..

It's not the position he takes. It's the way he takes it. Fear is not an issue (and lmao @ being afraid).I'll be as protective of my postion as anyone else here, but that's because the numbers & history back my position up. But I'll recognize an alternative position that is also backed by some history & numbers.That's the difference. Unless he's a lurking Shanahan, there's no way he can state with absolute assurance the course of future events - especially thye DEN RB position & the way its shaking out this year. It's the difference between convincing others that your position is the right one and insisting that their position is the wrong one. One leads to healthy debate, the other leads to pissing contests.

 

[Big Score]

Another thing is, you are taking a firm stance about a situation that no one else is willing to. The Den RB situation appears to be very cloudy, so when you come out and say "Mike Anderson is a stud", "Mike Anderson will be a top 10 guy this year", people will jump on you because they are not willing to take the same stance, for fear that their posts will be bumped and they'll be ridiculed and made fun of..

I agree with chedha. Cracks me up how some people are quite happy to rip SSOG a new one, but don't have the coconuts themselves to try and make sense of the Denver RB situation.Well actually I guess they are making a mini prediction. Seems to me that if they're in disagreement with SSOG, then they must be saying Anderson will NOT be the Denver RB.

 

[j3r3m3y]

. Another thing is, you are taking a firm stance about a situation that no one else is willing to. The Den RB situation appears to be very cloudy, so when you come out and say "Mike Anderson is a stud", "Mike Anderson will be a top 10 guy this year", people will jump on you because they are not willing to take the same stance, for fear that their posts will be bumped and they'll be ridiculed and made fun of..

You have made my point for me. But let me rephrase it. The Denver RB situation is cloudy. For that reason alone claiming that Mike Anderson is a stud and proclaiming it as fact (nevermind the weak disclaimer in his sig) is guessing at best. Maybe it is the highest probability guess but he touts it as if it is fact.Saying things like Ashley is the biggest deep threat in the game makes it even more difficult to take him seriously.