Eddie Royal going forward (1 Viewer)

[editor47]

I didn't really want to start another thread about the guy but ...

FBG has him ranked 27th at WR going forward. Obviously, someone on staff still has a high opinion of him, or owns him and is delusional.

Can a staff member please explain the reason for optimism? I can see it after week 1, maybe week 2, but 3 weeks is enough to drop hiim WAY down.

 

[BR33ZE]

I didn't really want to start another thread about the guy but ...FBG has him ranked 27th at WR going forward. Obviously, someone on staff still has a high opinion of him, or owns him and is delusional. Can a staff member please explain the reason for optimism? I can see it after week 1, maybe week 2, but 3 weeks is enough to drop hiim WAY down.

This is a just a guess, but the rankings reflect 3 weeks of actual results and 13 weeks of preseason forecast. They haven't gone back and re-evaluated the forecast since preseason which is a bad way to do rankings.

 

[editor47]

you're right. that's terrible if it's true. but i don't think it is because the article is clearly labeled TOP 250 GOING FORWARD. and people have been shuffled around.

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

I can't emphasize enough how important Cutler was to Royal last year.

 

[cjack]

I didn't really want to start another thread about the guy but ...FBG has him ranked 27th at WR going forward. Obviously, someone on staff still has a high opinion of him, or owns him and is delusional. Can a staff member please explain the reason for optimism? I can see it after week 1, maybe week 2, but 3 weeks is enough to drop hiim WAY down.

That seemed high to me as well. Unfortunately, I drafted Royal fairly high and I'm hugely disappointed. There are several other receivers ranked lower than 27 that I would rather have going forward. For whatever reason, he's not getting the targets. When guys like Gaffney and Stokely are being more productive, it's a huge cause for concern. I'm not quite ready to drop him from my team, due in part to where I drafted him, but he's the least productive guy on my roster right now. If I'm forced to make another roster move to cover injuries to guys like Gore or Felix Jones, Royal may be the most expendable.

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

Sort of surprised to hear the waiver podcast saying you HAVE to pick up Royal if he got dropped. I mean... I'm still hopeful, I drafted him on 3 teams, but at this point how many good games do you think he'll have in 2009?

 

[djjosee]

This is a just a guess, but the rankings reflect 3 weeks of actual results and 13 weeks of preseason forecast. They haven't gone back and re-evaluated the forecast since preseason which is a bad way to do rankings.

This can't be true ...

 

[saintfool]

you have think this production will pick up, especially with marshall opposite him. it's tough to justify though for a redraft league, i'm sure. dynasty? totally worth rostering.

 

[Johnny Rock]

 

[editor47]

you have think this production will pick up, especially with marshall opposite him. it's tough to justify though for a redraft league, i'm sure. dynasty? totally worth rostering.

how about in a keeper as opposed to a dynasty, which is where i have him. 15 man roster. 13 play every week.10 keepers. i gave up a lot to get him. but i always try to play for this year as long as i am in the mix. and i am. on the one hand, i am in first (total points league) with nothing from royal. on the other hand, i have gotten zip from him and byes are coming up. i don't know. if he really puts value of WR27 going forward then he'll be OK. but he's not putting up anywhere close to those numbers.

 

[BR33ZE]

This is a just a guess, but the rankings reflect 3 weeks of actual results and 13 weeks of preseason forecast. They haven't gone back and re-evaluated the forecast since preseason which is a bad way to do rankings.

This can't be true ...

lol. I was posting tongue and cheek. Of course they've updated projections since the preseason.To be serious, no way can Royal be ranked #29 going forward. The guy has like one catch this year. Let me guess they haven't moved Harvin up into the top 30 yet either. Is DeSean in the top 5 yet?The movement in the rankings is a tad slow.

 

[Comer]

Tired of Royal and dropped him. Royal has no value for me anymore

 

[Black]

Royal targets thru 3 weeks:

Eddie Royal

Wk1: 4

Wk2: 9

Wk3: 3

37.5% catch rate...

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

All we heard about was that Royal would play "the Welker role" with the arrival of McDaniels... instead he plays "the Hester role" with the arrival of Orton. He's going to have to break some big plays to get points.

 

[thatguy]

This is a just a guess, but the rankings reflect 3 weeks of actual results and 13 weeks of preseason forecast. They haven't gone back and re-evaluated the forecast since preseason which is a bad way to do rankings.

This can't be true ...

lol. I was posting tongue and cheek. Of course they've updated projections since the preseason.To be serious, no way can Royal be ranked #29 going forward. The guy has like one catch this year. Let me guess they haven't moved Harvin up into the top 30 yet either. Is DeSean in the top 5 yet?

The movement in the rankings is a tad slow.

This has been my one problem with the Top 250 Forward over the years... Always very slow to move fast starters up and very slow to move slow starters down - in some cases, this is the right call, but in others, you have to go with what your eyes and your gut are telling you. I still look forward to it every week because it's a "fun" read, but FBG's offers many other features that are far more valuable.

 

[editor47]

Royal targets thru 3 weeks:Eddie Royal Wk1: 4 Wk2: 9 Wk3: 337.5% catch rate...

i have never bought into the value of this stat. (targets). i mean, what constitutes a target? if the ball is 10 feet over my head but i'm the only WR there does that mean I was the target?

 

[BR33ZE]

Some of the going forward rankings are pretty senseless.

Braylon still at #22 while Burleson lingers down at #28.

Mario Manningham at WR #36 going forward... ummm that's a bit low there.

There are several others that are a bit comical.

No one in their right mind would trade #32 Harvin for #27 Royal.

:shuked:

 

[packersfan]

you have think this production will pick up, especially with marshall opposite him.

Why do we have to think that? I'm not being argumentative. I'm simply wondering what reasons there are to expect Royal to be a productive player besides blind hope. I'm a Royal owner and I really don't want to drop him but my league has tight roster limits and there are guys available on the WW who are producing and look like they will continue to produce. Right now, Royal is the No. 4 WR for the Broncos. That's the deal. Marshall, Gaffney and Stokley are all more involved in the passing game and based on the story I read today from the Colorado Springs paper, the coaching staff isn't feeling any sense of urgency to get the ball to Royal.I realize three games does not a season make. But we have a wealth of evidence currently to support the belief that Royal isn't going to produce and not a single shred of evidence that I can see which supports the belief Royal is going to start to produce. For those hoping for something out of Royal I'm wondering what evidence you're looking at which leads you to have optimism? Or are you just clinging to hope and/or not wanting to drop him given where you drafted him?

 

[the_Truth]

At least they're finally downgrading him.........after week 2 they inexplicably moved him UP 5 spots.

 

[packersfan]

All we heard about was that Royal would play "the Welker role" with the arrival of McDaniels... instead he plays "the Hester role" with the arrival of Orton. He's going to have to break some big plays to get points.

I'm not sure he's even playing the Rashied Davis role with Orton.

 

[BR33ZE]

Garcon is WR 61 going forward.

 

[PDX Pain]

Based on what I've seen from Denver, Orton and Royal over the first 3 weeks I have no reason to believe Royal is going to perform any where near his draft position, or any where near a WR3 or 2. I'm going to have to cut him this week to open a roster spot (bye week for some players coming up). He's isn't even trade-able anymore.

Funny thing is, I know he'll get picked up by someone after I drop him. For owners looking to scoop him off the WW he's a low risk/high reward "prospect" depending on who you drop. He's my worst WR, so I have no choice.

 

[PDX Pain]

you have think this production will pick up, especially with marshall opposite him.

Why do we have to think that? I'm not being argumentative. I'm simply wondering what reasons there are to expect Royal to be a productive player besides blind hope. I'm a Royal owner and I really don't want to drop him but my league has tight roster limits and there are guys available on the WW who are producing and look like they will continue to produce. Right now, Royal is the No. 4 WR for the Broncos. That's the deal. Marshall, Gaffney and Stokley are all more involved in the passing game and based on the story I read today from the Colorado Springs paper, the coaching staff isn't feeling any sense of urgency to get the ball to Royal.I realize three games does not a season make. But we have a wealth of evidence currently to support the belief that Royal isn't going to produce and not a single shred of evidence that I can see which supports the belief Royal is going to start to produce. For those hoping for something out of Royal I'm wondering what evidence you're looking at which leads you to have optimism? Or are you just clinging to hope and/or not wanting to drop him given where you drafted him?

Exactly.

 

[packersfan]

I'm looking for a reason (or reasons) not to drop this guy. So I'd really like to hear some if there are any. Right now, everything I see is tied into where Royal was drafted and being projected before the season. After three games, that is meaningless in my opinion.

 

[thatguy]

you have think this production will pick up, especially with marshall opposite him.

Why do we have to think that? I'm not being argumentative. I'm simply wondering what reasons there are to expect Royal to be a productive player besides blind hope. I'm a Royal owner and I really don't want to drop him but my league has tight roster limits and there are guys available on the WW who are producing and look like they will continue to produce. Right now, Royal is the No. 4 WR for the Broncos. That's the deal. Marshall, Gaffney and Stokley are all more involved in the passing game and based on the story I read today from the Colorado Springs paper, the coaching staff isn't feeling any sense of urgency to get the ball to Royal.I realize three games does not a season make. But we have a wealth of evidence currently to support the belief that Royal isn't going to produce and not a single shred of evidence that I can see which supports the belief Royal is going to start to produce. For those hoping for something out of Royal I'm wondering what evidence you're looking at which leads you to have optimism? Or are you just clinging to hope and/or not wanting to drop him given where you drafted him?

Exactly.

I agree as well... Royal could very well start producing, but we have no evidence at this point to suggest he will. On the contrary, all evidence suggests Denver is perfectly happy with the way things are and is in no hurry to get Royal more involved in the game plan.

 

[SCT]

I used to put a lot of stock in the top 250 forward until I realized that guys move DRASTICALLY or RIDICULOUSLY SLOWLY in random sequence. Burned me a few times on trades, etc. I now treat it like the cbssportsline guru: don't even look.

 

[mbuehner]

Best argument I can make in favor of Royal is that Denver eventually has to play an opponent that isn't god awful, at which point they will get their brains beat in and be forced to air the ball out.

 

[packersfan]

I'm looking for a reason (or reasons) not to drop this guy. So I'd really like to hear some if there are any. Right now, everything I see is tied into where Royal was drafted and being projected before the season. After three games, that is meaningless in my opinion.

Two big reasons. One, Royal has the talent to produce (look at what he did last year). Two, McDaniels is likely to eventually open up the offense to fully utilize the talent on his team. He is playing it conservative for now because of a new QB, new system, and the fact that the Broncos have yet to really trail in any football game this year.

I agree about Royal being talented. However, I consider his talent offset by what I view as the significant downgrade at QB from Cutler to Orton. As far as opening things up, that's possible but given Royal's current position as the No. 4 WR I wonder what would prompt McDaniels to start utilizing him more if he isn't inclined to utilize him now.

 

[Mystery Achiever]

I'm looking for a reason (or reasons) not to drop this guy. So I'd really like to hear some if there are any. Right now, everything I see is tied into where Royal was drafted and being projected before the season. After three games, that is meaningless in my opinion.

Two big reasons. One, Royal has the talent to produce (look at what he did last year). Two, McDaniels is likely to eventually open up the offense to fully utilize the talent on his team. He is playing it conservative for now because of a new QB, new system, and the fact that the Broncos have yet to really trail in any football game this year.

You two pretty much capture the debate I've been having with myself (drafted as WR2) on whether to drop him or Coles. I'm not sure if three games is enough to write him off, but it is close.

 

[None_More_Black]

I'm looking for a reason (or reasons) not to drop this guy. So I'd really like to hear some if there are any. Right now, everything I see is tied into where Royal was drafted and being projected before the season. After three games, that is meaningless in my opinion.

Denver has played a pretty easy schedule. Royal may get more involved when Denver needs to pass more.

 

[packersfan]

I'm looking for a reason (or reasons) not to drop this guy. So I'd really like to hear some if there are any. Right now, everything I see is tied into where Royal was drafted and being projected before the season. After three games, that is meaningless in my opinion.

Two big reasons. One, Royal has the talent to produce (look at what he did last year). Two, McDaniels is likely to eventually open up the offense to fully utilize the talent on his team. He is playing it conservative for now because of a new QB, new system, and the fact that the Broncos have yet to really trail in any football game this year.

You two pretty much capture the debate I've been having with myself (drafted as WR2) on whether to drop him or Coles. I'm not sure if three games is enough to write him off, but it is close.

That's my debate too. Like I said, I really don't want to drop the guy. I want to believe the player I believed would be a strong WR3 but I would really like to have some evidence to support this belief as opposed to blind hope which is the only reason I can currently think of to keep him. Every article I read from the Broncos comes out and says they don't feel any urgency to get the ball to Royal. That's a rather huge red flag in my opinion. I realize coaches aren't going to spell out what they want to do but you'd think if they viewed Royal as a vital part of their passing game they might talk about how they'd like him to get more than 1 or 2 catches a game. But that isn't the case and that along with his poor production and non-involvement in the passing game has me wondering if things are going to change for him this season. I'm sure they'll get better - it's pretty tough for it to get any worse - but will it get better to the point of him being a WR3 or even a WR4? I'm definitely not convinced of his WR3 potential any longer and I'm not sure he'll even be able to salvage WR4 production given how far away from that level he has been the first three games.

 

[BoulderBob]

Orton doesn't have the tools to produce a stud WR and Royal isn't good enough yet to put up stud numbers without a rifle-armed QB who can hit him on the deeper routes.

100% sure of this, cut him without worry in re-draft/keeper,

In dynasty leagues, you have to hold, because McDaniels will certainly bring in HIS guy this off-season.

 

[Mystery Achiever]

[ Every article I read from the Broncos comes out and says they don't feel any urgency to get the ball to Royal. That's a rather huge red flag in my opinion. I realize coaches aren't going to spell out what they want to do but you'd think if they viewed Royal as a vital part of their passing game they might talk about how they'd like him to get more than 1 or 2 catches a game.

Esp. coming from one of the Bill B wannabees. PS - Do you have any links or just sites to direct me to? I'd like to read those quotes..

 

[saintfool]

you have think this production will pick up, especially with marshall opposite him.

Why do we have to think that? I'm not being argumentative. I'm simply wondering what reasons there are to expect Royal to be a productive player besides blind hope. I'm a Royal owner and I really don't want to drop him but my league has tight roster limits and there are guys available on the WW who are producing and look like they will continue to produce. Right now, Royal is the No. 4 WR for the Broncos. That's the deal. Marshall, Gaffney and Stokley are all more involved in the passing game and based on the story I read today from the Colorado Springs paper, the coaching staff isn't feeling any sense of urgency to get the ball to Royal.I realize three games does not a season make. But we have a wealth of evidence currently to support the belief that Royal isn't going to produce and not a single shred of evidence that I can see which supports the belief Royal is going to start to produce. For those hoping for something out of Royal I'm wondering what evidence you're looking at which leads you to have optimism? Or are you just clinging to hope and/or not wanting to drop him given where you drafted him?

Denver is near the bottom in pass attempts. denver is near the top in rush attempts. they have been able to win against weaker teams by running the ball a lot. this is to be expected really given everything that is being thrown at them. my thinking is that the offense is still a classroom for these players. it is a new offense that is taking time to adjust to. gaffney has the advantage of familiarity but no one in the passing game is really running away with it at this point. royal is too talented to think he can be usurped by journeyman roleplayers like stokely and gaffney.their schedule gets harder and it's hard to believe that they'll be ahead in their remaining games. they'll have to pass more. i don't think royal will put up the numbers he did last year but he's still worth holding onto. i don't know that you're going to get a better "talent + opportunity" ratio in a WW player but i'd wait a little longer. in dynasty, he's still worth holding onto.

 

[packersfan]

[ Every article I read from the Broncos comes out and says they don't feel any urgency to get the ball to Royal. That's a rather huge red flag in my opinion. I realize coaches aren't going to spell out what they want to do but you'd think if they viewed Royal as a vital part of their passing game they might talk about how they'd like him to get more than 1 or 2 catches a game.

Esp. coming from one of the Bill B wannabees. PS - Do you have any links or just sites to direct me to? I'd like to read those quotes..

This is the latest story I read today. Again, no quotes even remotely hinting at a desire to get Royal more involved. Link

 

[shuke]

I didn't really want to start another thread about the guy but ...FBG has him ranked 27th at WR going forward. Obviously, someone on staff still has a high opinion of him, or owns him and is delusional. Can a staff member please explain the reason for optimism? I can see it after week 1, maybe week 2, but 3 weeks is enough to drop hiim WAY down.

This is a just a guess, but the rankings reflect 3 weeks of actual results and 13 weeks of preseason forecast. They haven't gone back and re-evaluated the forecast since preseason which is a bad way to do rankings.

Quite the accusation you're making there.

 

[Black]

Royal targets thru 3 weeks:Eddie Royal Wk1: 4 Wk2: 9 Wk3: 337.5% catch rate...

i have never bought into the value of this stat. (targets). i mean, what constitutes a target? if the ball is 10 feet over my head but i'm the only WR there does that mean I was the target?

I can't tell you what they use to count a target, but I can tell you that it's a great way to see who's getting thrown at and how well they do with it.They are not throwing the ball to Royal, and they are winning. I don't trust daddy Mc to change much.

 

[packersfan]

As far as a ranking going forward, I don't know how Royal can be ranked in the Top 40 in good conscience given how he's the No. 4 WR on his team and there's nothing at the present time which indicates that's going to change. A Top 50 ranking is pretty generous too in my opinion.

 

[UnknownCoach]

Orton seemed to have a connection with Royal in the pre-season. I expect better performance but I dont think Denver is going to be throwing a lot this year. Orton isnt that type of QB plus they have a good D and running attack. Shanny and Cutler are gone. Fantasy has taken a back seat in Denver.

 

[BR33ZE]

I didn't really want to start another thread about the guy but ...FBG has him ranked 27th at WR going forward. Obviously, someone on staff still has a high opinion of him, or owns him and is delusional. Can a staff member please explain the reason for optimism? I can see it after week 1, maybe week 2, but 3 weeks is enough to drop hiim WAY down.

This is a just a guess, but the rankings reflect 3 weeks of actual results and 13 weeks of preseason forecast. They haven't gone back and re-evaluated the forecast since preseason which is a bad way to do rankings.

Quite the accusation you're making there.

It was obvious schtick there cappy.

 

[BR33ZE]

Here is a much more reliable Top 50 WR going forward:

WR1 Reggie Wayne

WR2 Randy Moss

WR3 Andre Johnson

WR4 Larry Fitzgerald

WR5 Marques Colston

WR6 DeSean Jackson

WR7 Vincent Jackson

WR8 Greg Jennings

WR9 Calvin Johnson

WR10 Jerricho Cotchery

WR11 Steve Smith

WR12 Anquan Boldin

WR13 Donald Driver

WR14 Steve Smith

WR15 Roddy White

WR16 Chad Ochocinco

WR17 Hines Ward

WR18 Nate Burleson

WR19 Santonio Holmes

WR20 Wes Welker

WR21 Brandon Marshall

WR22 Mario Manningham

WR23 Kevin Walter

WR24 Roy Williams

WR25 Percy Harvin

WR26 Mike Walker

WR27 Dwayne Bowe

WR28 Derrick Mason

WR29 Devin Hester

WR30 Santana Moss

WR31 Terrell Owens

WR32 Earl Bennett

WR33 Braylon Edwards

WR34 Steve Breaston

WR35 Pierre Garcon

WR36 Michael Jenkins

WR37 Torry Holt

WR38 Patrick Crayton

WR39 Johnny Knox

WR40 Laveranues Coles

WR41 Bernard Berrian

WR42 Lee Evans

WR43 Justin Gage

WR44 Mark Clayton

WR45 Ted Ginn

WR46 Devery Henderson

WR47 Antonio Bryant

WR48 Josh Morgan

WR49 Bobby Wade

WR50 Chansi Stuckey

 

[saintfool]

As far as a ranking going forward, I don't know how Royal can be ranked in the Top 40 in good conscience given how he's the No. 4 WR on his team and there's nothing at the present time which indicates that's going to change. A Top 50 ranking is pretty generous too in my opinion.

you're speaking a little too broadly here, i think. he's WR2 on his team. he has not been demoted or benched. looking at profootballfocus, through the first two games, he's been on the field for more plays than either stokely or gaffney. i know your point is that the production is behind other receivers on the team but i wanted to make that clear for the purposes of the discussion here.

 

[Mystery Achiever]

This is the latest story I read today. Again, no quotes even remotely hinting at a desire to get Royal more involved.

Link

Thanks!

 

[Ahmad Rashad]

As far as a ranking going forward, I don't know how Royal can be ranked in the Top 40 in good conscience given how he's the No. 4 WR on his team and there's nothing at the present time which indicates that's going to change. A Top 50 ranking is pretty generous too in my opinion.

I'm not sure if he's the No. 4, but I think he's at least No. 3 behind Marshall and Gaffney in terms of Orton's preferences (and No. 2 in terms of playing time). I watched part of the game on Sunday, and IIRC they said Orton watched lots of film and concluded that Gaffney was very valuable in this offense. Marshall seems to be getting more involved with an improved attitude and improved knowledge of the playbook. He's a premier talent, so I've held on to him and started him this past week. Royal I think was more a product of the offense with Cutler last year, and his role has somewhat been taken over by Gaffney and reduced because of the strong running game. He's still very talented, but not at Marshall's level and not irreplaceable. In the tight-roster league where I had him, I waived him and picked up Mason, who someone waived after his bad week 2.If they pass more, I'm not sure Royal's targets would go up much. Marshall, Gaffney, Scheffler and Moreno may get increased targets instead. As for the preseason, remember that Marshall wasn't playing then.

 

[Mystery Achiever]

FWIW, here are week 3 targets via Fantasyguru.com:

Denver

• WR Brandon Marshall(notes) had 7 pass targets and 5 receptions for 67 yards, with a long of 23 yards. He had 2 deep balls and 1 goal-line target.

• WR Jabar Gaffney(notes) had 6 pass targets and 4 receptions for 39 yards, with a long of 15 yards. He had 2 red zone targets, including 1 goal-line target.

• TE Daniel Graham(notes) had 3 pass targets and 2 receptions for 33 yards, with a long of 24 yards.

• TE Tony Scheffler(notes) had 1 pass target and 1 reception for 14 yards.

• WR Eddie Royal(notes) had 3 pass targets and 1 reception for 4 yards. He had 1 deep ball and 1 goal-line target.

• FB Peyton Hillis(notes) had 1 pass target and 0 receptions. He had 1 goal-line target.

 

[packersfan]

As far as a ranking going forward, I don't know how Royal can be ranked in the Top 40 in good conscience given how he's the No. 4 WR on his team and there's nothing at the present time which indicates that's going to change. A Top 50 ranking is pretty generous too in my opinion.

Royal and Marshall are the starters. So, at worst, Royal is the No. 2 WR on his team.http://subscribers.footballguys.com/apps/depthchart.php#den

He's tied for third among the WRs in receptions and the guy he's tied with (Stokley) didn't have a pass thrown to him in Week 3. I realize Royal is a starter but he's a starter on a team that looks like it's morphing into a running team and one that has a rotation in place among its WRs. In terms of production, Royal is a starter in name only. I think the Broncos made a conscious effort to get Marshall more involved in their passing game which is smart since he's very talented. However, the Broncos have shown no such inclination to do the same with Royal, which makes me wonder if the people who most strongly believe in his talent are fantasy football players and not members of the Broncos' coaching staff.

In my opinion, the two most telling things about the first three games for Royal are his lack of production and the fact the Broncos have shown zero interest to get him more involved. The argument that they're winning without him doesn't go very far since they were 2-0 with Marshall not doing much and they still made a decision to get him more involved in Week 3.

 

[Kitrick Taylor]

Think of Eddie Royal as Lee Evans, circa 2007. Evans had just broken out in 2006 with a 1292 yard 8 TD season. Better than Royal's 2008, but bear with me.

In 2007 the Bills drafted Trent Edwards. Edwards ended up splitting time that season with JP Losman, and it ended up being a down season for all parties.

Evans first five games in 2007?

2 receptions 5 yards

2/17

1/7

6/72

1/12

Total of 12/113 with 0 TDs in 5 games!

His next five games?

5/98

5/138/1

9/165/1

4/65

4/40

27/506/2

Evans didn't lose his talent. Neither has Royal. Evans bounced back with a respectable 2008, but is still struggling with Edwards at QB. Those of you who want to write off Royal in re-draft for options on the WW, I can see some validity there. Orton is not Cutler in terms of arm strength, and this is a brand new system. It will take some time for this passing game to get up to speed. Going forward, either Orton is going to get this passing game running or he will be replaced. I think he's on a one year job interview. This may be bad for redrafters as Royal will probably have some very nice weeks, but he will probably be very inconsistent with them. In dynasty, it has all the makings of a down year or two for Royal, unless Orton gets it together.

 

[editor47]

i am a little disappointed no one from FBG jumped in here to explain themselves.

 

[saintfool]

He's tied for third among the WRs in receptions and the guy he's tied with (Stokley) didn't have a pass thrown to him in Week 3. I realize Royal is a starter but he's a starter on a team that looks like it's morphing into a running team and one that has a rotation in place among its WRs. In terms of production, Royal is a starter in name only. I think the Broncos made a conscious effort to get Marshall more involved in their passing game which is smart since he's very talented. However, the Broncos have shown no such inclination to do the same with Royal, which makes me wonder if the people who most strongly believe in his talent are fantasy football players and not members of the Broncos' coaching staff. In my opinion, the two most telling things about the first three games for Royal are his lack of production and the fact the Broncos have shown zero interest to get him more involved. The argument that they're winning without him doesn't go very far since they were 2-0 with Marshall not doing much and they still made a decision to get him more involved in Week 3.

i think mcdaniels *had* to get marshall going for a number of reasons. they need their best WR on the field and productive for this team to have any chance of winning. they need marshall to be happy because of the media firestorm it could cause. any coach's first responsibility is to win games and right now denver is winning. orton isn't being asked to carry the team in a game. that will change as they play better teams and that's waiting in the wings for them. will marshall be enough? i somehow doubt it. stokely and gaffney - as the #3 & 4 WRs - are long shots to outproduce the #2WR. i can't remember the last time that happened, barring injury. i don't get the impression that royal is a disappointment to the coaches or how he might be in their doghouse. in short, i think you're reading too much into it. mcdaniels - a BB protege - won't tip his hand, especially after what he experienced this offseason. as along as he's on the field then he's got a terrific opportunity to excel.that said, if i am in a redraft league and i'm struggling then i probably looking to unload him. in dynasty or keeper, i wouldn't. i'm also secretly hoping that orton stinks it up because they need a QB that can do more. as long as they're winning, orton will continue to figure into their plans. that's exactly how it worked for him in Chicago.

 

[editor47]

bye eddie royal. hello justin durant. just swapped 1 for 1 ... i don't care that royal cost me a first in 2010. i want to win now.