Ron Dayne to get bigger workload? (1 Viewer)

[SSOG]

I hate to be the voice of reason in all this, but the bottom line in all this is there isn't a stud runningback in Denver this season. None of these guys are franchise back material and so nobody will get star treatment or unquestioned loyalty from the coaching staff based on past performance. It's a crap shoot from a fantasy perspective and the back that plays the best over the next few games will probably be named the starter.

Place a bet on your favorite player, but this is going to be decided on the field of play and nothing Pony Boy, SSOG, or anybody on this board says will matter until that plays itself out.

Blasphemy. There is still a stud RB in Denver. His name is Mike Anderson.I'm tired of making my arguements over and over again, so I just sigged it. We'll all see how it works out in the long run.

 

[Paper Lions]

Place a bet on your favorite player, but this is going to be decided on the field of play and nothing Pony Boy, SSOG, or anybody on this board says will matter until that plays itself out.

I think most everyone in this thread agrees with you on this one.

 

[SSOG]

Edit: Besides, where on earth does it say that Shanahan himself is unsure of the situation? ...

Shanahan said Anderson remains the starter heading into the game against the Kansas City Chiefs at Invesco Field at Mile High on Monday night.

He also seemed to endorse Bell as the primary backup, if his left ankle heals quickly.

Looking for the uncertainty. Mike Anderson = starter. Tatum Bell = primary backup, if he heals quickly. Seems pretty clear on both points. He says he's unsure of how the carries will shake out, but any coach can say that on any given week. I can tell you one thing- the starter will get the majority of the carries. That's why he's the starter. And even a 60/40 split of Denver's traditional rushing averages works out to 17 carries... and Denver rarely goes to a 60/40 split.It's like saying there's uncertainty in KC. No there isn't. Holmes is the starter, Johnson is the backup. Holmes gets about twice as many carries as Johnson. Replace Holmes with Anderson and Johnson with... well, I dunno. But replace Holmes with Anderson and welcome to Denver.

 

[Football Menace]

dayne is no different..

... except that he won't become the starting RB over a healthy Mike Anderson.If Anderson is healthy, Anderson is the starter. All season, unless Denver gets eliminated early and starts looking towards the future. Take it to the bank.

Dude, you freakin' kill me. Again? One of your many adamanat, close minded posts yesterday stated something to the effect that one of the only 2 Bronco insiders you would consider valid is Pony Boy. So he posts something that shows Shanahan himself is unsure of what the situation is, yet you are sure. I'm done playing tag with you on this. It's simple. You are the all knowing regarding Anderson and the Bronco RB situation, and others, including Shanahan, don't know squat. Don't bother to reply to this.

Oh darn, I bothered replying. I hate when that happens.

Read again. I said that I LISTEN to Pony Boy's posts. I don't take them as the gospel truth. I still assimilate all information and make up my own mind. I'm not being closeminded, because I actually listen to every piece of information before I make up my mind... but I have made up my mind on the matter. Every piece of information I have assimilated leads me to believe what I believe.

You guys should do me the same courtesy. Listen to my opinion, assimilate it, and then make up your own mind based on the information that you receive. If you disagree with me, that's just fine. Make up your own mind. I've already made up mine. Does that suit everyone quite nicely?

Edit: Besides, where on earth does it say that Shanahan himself is unsure of the situation? I see Shanahan saying that Anderson is still the starter... I guess that's what you mean by Shanahan being unsure. You know, the fact that he says one guy is still the starter clearly demonstrates that he doesn't know where everything stands.

Maybe. Just maybe it's the part where he says:"I can't tell you exactly what our plan is. We have to decide it ourselves."

 

[j3r3m3y]

Blasphemy. There is still a stud RB in Denver. His name is Mike Anderson.

I'm tired of making my arguements over and over again, so I just sigged it. We'll all see how it works out in the long run.

Averaging 1.5 FPPG and you are calling him a stud?

 

[SSOG]

Maybe. Just maybe it's the part where he says:

"I can't tell you exactly what our plan is. We have to decide it ourselves."

I feel like that's just coachspeak. The relevant information that I took away from that article was that Anderson was the starter, and Bell is the primary backup if he's healthy. I now look at how Denver's starter and backup traditionally perform, and I project how many carries each is going to get.I'll be shocked if, barring setback, Anderson gets fewer than the 15 carries he had vs. San Diego.

 

[j3r3m3y]

Maybe. Just maybe it's the part where he says:

"I can't tell you exactly what our plan is. We have to decide it ourselves."

I feel like that's just coachspeak. The relevant information that I took away from that article was that Anderson was the starter, and Bell is the primary backup if he's healthy. I now look at how Denver's starter and backup traditionally perform, and I project how many carries each is going to get.I'll be shocked if, barring setback, Anderson gets fewer than the 15 carries he had vs. San Diego.

And the same 3 fantasy points? That is stud material right there.

 

[SSOG]

Blasphemy. There is still a stud RB in Denver. His name is Mike Anderson.

I'm tired of making my arguements over and over again, so I just sigged it. We'll all see how it works out in the long run.

Averaging 1.5 FPPG and you are calling him a stud?

What's his career average FPPG as a starting RB in Denver? What is Denver's starting RB's average FPPG? Yes, 1.5 FPPG and I'm calling him a stud. And I might be going out on a limb there, but I feel very solidly about that prediction.It's a shame we don't all live in a world where people are bold enough to go out on a limb when making projections. I bet you're the kind of guy who predicts the 8 division champions to repeat every year.

 

[el-gato-grande]

I hate to be the voice of reason in all this, but the bottom line in all this is there isn't a stud runningback in Denver this season.  None of these guys are franchise back material and so nobody will get star treatment or unquestioned loyalty from the coaching staff based on past performance.  It's a crap shoot from a fantasy perspective and the back that plays the best over the next few games will probably be named the starter. 

Place a bet on your favorite player, but this is going to be decided on the field of play and nothing Pony Boy, SSOG, or anybody on this board says will matter until that plays itself out.

Blasphemy. There is still a stud RB in Denver. His name is Mike Anderson.I'm tired of making my arguements over and over again, so I just sigged it. We'll all see how it works out in the long run.

These kind of comments will hurt your credibility in the Shark Pool SSOG. Stud RB's don't spend the bulk of their careers at fullback. Stud runningbacks don't start just 38 out of 61 games in their career. I like Mike Anderson. He is a good player and a serviceable starter at this stage in his career, but he isn't a stud.

 

[SSOG]

Maybe. Just maybe it's the part where he says:

"I can't tell you exactly what our plan is. We have to decide it ourselves."

I feel like that's just coachspeak. The relevant information that I took away from that article was that Anderson was the starter, and Bell is the primary backup if he's healthy. I now look at how Denver's starter and backup traditionally perform, and I project how many carries each is going to get.I'll be shocked if, barring setback, Anderson gets fewer than the 15 carries he had vs. San Diego.

And the same 3 fantasy points? That is stud material right there.

Ummm... you'll notice that I predicted that Denver would struggle against San Diego.Lo and behold, they did.

That said, I don't see what kind of scoring system he only scored 3 points in. Maybe you're discounting his receiving numbers? I've got him down for 18 touches, 90 yards, an average of 5 yards per touch.

Alright, if you're so smart and all-knowing, how about you make YOUR projections for how Anderson will do next week and for the season, and I'll make MY projections for how Anderson will do next week and for the season, and we'll see just who has a better handle on the situation here.

 

[P Boy]

Another example of a myth about Shanahan.Ted Sundquist has held the GM title in Denver since 2001. Coincidentally, Denver's success rate in the draft and free agency prior to 2001 is ASTRONOMICALLY higher than Denver's success rate in the draft and free agency since 2001. Are we all so sure that Shanny's such a bad GM?

If you honestly think Sunquist is making any decisions regarding selcting players on/off the Broncos roster, you know much less about the Broncos than I had originally given you credit for. I'll take anything further with appropriate weighted measure.

 

[SSOG]

I hate to be the voice of reason in all this, but the bottom line in all this is there isn't a stud runningback in Denver this season. None of these guys are franchise back material and so nobody will get star treatment or unquestioned loyalty from the coaching staff based on past performance. It's a crap shoot from a fantasy perspective and the back that plays the best over the next few games will probably be named the starter.

Place a bet on your favorite player, but this is going to be decided on the field of play and nothing Pony Boy, SSOG, or anybody on this board says will matter until that plays itself out.

Blasphemy. There is still a stud RB in Denver. His name is Mike Anderson.I'm tired of making my arguements over and over again, so I just sigged it. We'll all see how it works out in the long run.

These kind of comments will hurt your credibility in the Shark Pool SSOG. Stud RB's don't spend the bulk of their careers at fullback. Stud runningbacks don't start just 38 out of 61 games in their career. I like Mike Anderson. He is a good player and a serviceable starter at this stage in his career, but he isn't a stud.

Reuben Droughns was the #14 fantasy RB in 12 games. Clinton Portis was always top 5 in Denver. Mike Anderson was himself the #5 RB in fantasy football in 2000 (despite only getting 12 starts).Is Mike Anderson a stud in NFL terms? No way. Is Mike Anderson Denver's starting RB? Absolutely. Is Denver's starting RB a stud in fantasy terms? ABSOLUTELY.

If these claims hurt my credibility, then so be it. I'll make sure next time that none of my projections deviate so much as a point from what Footballguys tells me I should think.

Again, I'm going out on a limb here and opening myself up to public ridicule. I'm not doing that just to get a reaction, I'm doing that because I think I'm right. Who cares about someone who predicts that Peyton Manning will be a top 3 QB? Where's the danger in that prediction? I want a guy who will actually predict the SURPRISES.

If someone predicted SD would be 12-4 last offseason, you'd probably say they were just hurting their credibility. Me, I'd say "interesting" and wait to see how it played out. And in the end, they would have been the boldest and best prognosticator out of the whole bunch. Anyone can predict the sure things. I want to see someone predict the surprises.

If you honestly think Sunquist is making any decisions regarding selcting players on/off the Broncos roster, you know much less about the Broncos than I had originally given you credit for. I'll take anything further with appropriate weighted measure.

He is the GM, isn't he? From everything I've read, Sundquist makes the recommendations and Shanahan makes the final decisions. Still, you can't discount the fact that Denver's personnel decisions have slipped ever since Sundquist started making the recommendations.Besides, if you really think that Denver is in the bottom 50% at evaluating talent, then you know much less about the Broncos then I had originally given you credit for. I'll take anything further with appropriate weighted measure.

 

[Judge Smails]

Give SSOG his blankey so he'll stop holding his breath.

 

[Football Menace]

I hate to be the voice of reason in all this, but the bottom line in all this is there isn't a stud runningback in Denver this season.  None of these guys are franchise back material and so nobody will get star treatment or unquestioned loyalty from the coaching staff based on past performance.  It's a crap shoot from a fantasy perspective and the back that plays the best over the next few games will probably be named the starter. 

Place a bet on your favorite player, but this is going to be decided on the field of play and nothing Pony Boy, SSOG, or anybody on this board says will matter until that plays itself out.

Blasphemy. There is still a stud RB in Denver. His name is Mike Anderson.I'm tired of making my arguements over and over again, so I just sigged it. We'll all see how it works out in the long run.

These kind of comments will hurt your credibility in the Shark Pool SSOG. Stud RB's don't spend the bulk of their careers at fullback. Stud runningbacks don't start just 38 out of 61 games in their career. I like Mike Anderson. He is a good player and a serviceable starter at this stage in his career, but he isn't a stud.

Reuben Droughns was the #14 fantasy RB in 12 games. Clinton Portis was always top 5 in Denver. Mike Anderson was himself the #5 RB in fantasy football in 2000 (despite only getting 12 starts).Is Mike Anderson a stud in NFL terms? No way. Is Mike Anderson Denver's starting RB? Absolutely. Is Denver's starting RB a stud in fantasy terms? ABSOLUTELY.

If these claims hurt my credibility, then so be it. I'll make sure next time that none of my projections deviate so much as a point from what Footballguys tells me I should think.

Again, I'm going out on a limb here and opening myself up to public ridicule. I'm not doing that just to get a reaction, I'm doing that because I think I'm right. Who cares about someone who predicts that Peyton Manning will be a top 3 QB? Where's the danger in that prediction? I want a guy who will actually predict the SURPRISES.

If someone predicted SD would be 12-4 last offseason, you'd probably say they were just hurting their credibility. Me, I'd say "interesting" and wait to see how it played out. And in the end, they would have been the boldest and best prognosticator out of the whole bunch. Anyone can predict the sure things. I want to see someone predict the surprises.

If you honestly think Sunquist is making any decisions regarding selcting players on/off the Broncos roster, you know much less about the Broncos than I had originally given you credit for. I'll take anything further with appropriate weighted measure.

He is the GM, isn't he? From everything I've read, Sundquist makes the recommendations and Shanahan makes the final decisions. Still, you can't discount the fact that Denver's personnel decisions have slipped ever since Sundquist started making the recommendations.Besides, if you really think that Denver is in the bottom 50% at evaluating talent, then you know much less about the Broncos then I had originally given you credit for. I'll take anything further with appropriate weighted measure.

You said it yourself. Shanny makes the final call. I'll blame the guy who makes the final call every time.I make the recommendation that you go jump off the ledge. You do it. Who's fault is it that your dead?

My dad always said, "You give a man enough rope, eventually he'll hang himself."

 

[spec1alk]

this is why I avoided the DEN rb's like the plauge in ALL of my leagues.

 

[SSOG]

You said it yourself. Shanny makes the final call. I'll blame the guy who makes the final call every time.

I make the recommendation that you go jump off the ledge. You do it. Who's fault is it that your dead?

My dad always said, "You give a man enough rope, eventually he'll hang himself."

Truisms and cliches aside, if someone's getting bad recommendations, he does not deserve all of the blame. He hires guys to give him good recommendations, and then listens to them.Bellichick is considered a genius in part because he delegates to Pioli, Weis, and Crennel... and then he listens to their recommendations. Same with Andy Reid. So both of them are geniuses for doing the same thing Shanahan has done that's made him a goat? I think it's their staffs that deserve the genius label. At least insofar as assembling a roster is concerned.

 

[SSOG]

this is why I avoided the DEN rb's like the plauge in ALL of my leagues.

Yeah man, how much would it suck to have to devote one or maybe even two roster spots, as well as a couple of late round picks, to lock up what will probably be one of the top 5 rushing attacks in the league.

 

[j3r3m3y]

Maybe. Just maybe it's the part where he says:

"I can't tell you exactly what our plan is. We have to decide it ourselves."

I feel like that's just coachspeak. The relevant information that I took away from that article was that Anderson was the starter, and Bell is the primary backup if he's healthy. I now look at how Denver's starter and backup traditionally perform, and I project how many carries each is going to get.I'll be shocked if, barring setback, Anderson gets fewer than the 15 carries he had vs. San Diego.

And the same 3 fantasy points? That is stud material right there.

Ummm... you'll notice that I predicted that Denver would struggle against San Diego.Lo and behold, they did.

That said, I don't see what kind of scoring system he only scored 3 points in. Maybe you're discounting his receiving numbers? I've got him down for 18 touches, 90 yards, an average of 5 yards per touch.

Alright, if you're so smart and all-knowing, how about you make YOUR projections for how Anderson will do next week and for the season, and I'll make MY projections for how Anderson will do next week and for the season, and we'll see just who has a better handle on the situation here.

My projection is that the watter is so muddy that anyone who "predicts" who will be the "stud" of the Denver RB's is just making guesses. Even Shanny said that they have to figure out what they are doing before they can tell anyone else. You choose to dismiss that as "coach speak" but I choose to take that as the most honest thing he said.A "healthy" Anderson is clearly the number one, I agree with that. But the fact of the matter is he is not healthy, nor will he be healthy for quite some time. Have you ever torn cartilage in your rib cage? Neither have I. I talked to someone who did in college once and the outlook is not good. Apparently it hurts a little just to breathe. God forbid you sneeze. He was a wrestler and told me that it was a couple MONTHS until he felt right again. Flack jacket or no, everytime Anderson touches the ball he risks making it worse, or at the very least delaying the healing.

I don't know what the future holds for the Denver RB's, but your claims of Anderson being a stud don't seem very likely given that a) there are 3 viable RB's in Denver b) He is gimpy and c) The Denver organization is high on Dayne, high enough that he will vulture carries in every game from here on out and d) his 3 total points in 2 games.

As far as our scoring system, pretty standard 1 point per 20 yards rushing and receiving. -1 for the fumble lost. 3 points total.

 

[SSOG]

...but your claims of Anderson being a stud don't seem very likely given that a) there are 3 viable RB's in Denver b) He is gimpy and c) The Denver organization is high on Dayne, high enough that he will vulture carries in every game from here on out and d) his 3 total points in 2 games.

Maybe not, but like I said, at least I'm going out on a limb and making projections.

 

[j3r3m3y]

...but your claims of Anderson being a stud don't seem very likely given that a) there are 3 viable RB's in Denver b) He is gimpy and c) The Denver organization is high on Dayne, high enough that he will vulture carries in every game from here on out and d) his 3 total points in 2 games.

Maybe not, but like I said, at least I'm going out on a limb and making projections.

Good job, and good luck with that.My position is that there is not enough reliable information out there to make a clear "projection" and that any speculation that any one of the three will be a "stud" is just a plain old guess.

I can make guesses all day long if you want me too. I project Dayne to get a goal line TD this week. I project Anderson to be limited to 15 carries again. I project Elam to miss another field goal.

Man, guessing is easy.

 

[P Boy]

Besides, if you really think that Denver is in the bottom 50% at evaluating talent, then you know much less about the Broncos then I had originally given you credit for. I'll take anything further with appropriate weighted measure.

LOL. I'll let the facts do the talking for themselves. How many of these guys that Shanahan drafted at theses positions are still starters for the team? (note - no cherry picking. These are all the draft picks at these positions over Shanahan's tenure).QB

2004 Matt Mauck

2004 Bradlee Van Pelt

2000 Jarious Jackson

1998 Brian Griese

1996 Jeff Lewis

WR

2004 Triandos Luke

2003 Adrian Madise

2002 Ashley Lelie

2002 Herb Haygood

2001 Kevin Kasper

2000 Chris Cole

2000 Muneer Moore

2000 Leroy Fields

1999 Travis McGriff

1999 Chad Plummer

1999 Billy Miller

1998 Marcus Nash

1996 Patrick Jeffers

1995 Byron Chamberlain

DE

2003 Bryant McNeal

2003 Aaron Hunt

2003 Clint Mitchell

2001 Paul Toviessi

2001 Reggie Hayward

1999 David Bowens

1997 Trevor Pryce

DT

2003 Nicholas Eason

2002 Dorsett Davis

2002 Monsanto Pope

2000 Jerry Johnson

1996 Mark Campbell

DB

2004 Jeremy LeSueur

2004 Jeff Shoate

2002 Sam Brandon

2002 Chris Young

2001 Willie Middlebrooks

2000 Deltha O'Neal

2000 Ian Gold

2000 Kenoy Kennedy

1999 Chris Watson

1999 Darwin Brown

1998 Eric Brown

1997 Cory Gilliard

1996 Tory James

1996 Darius Johnson

1996 Tony Veland

How about his playoff record without 2 HoF caliber players in his backfield? Should we look how his teams have performed in the playoffs when he didn't have a guy named Elway handing off to a guy named T Davis?

Shanahan has an uncanny knack for picking RBs who perform well for him in DEN, and he can draft LBs pretty well. I'll give him huge credit for that - and there is no one in the league that can coach up a rushing offense like he can. He's hit-or-miss at O-line. But the rest of the positions on the field? Well, take a look above.

 

[glumpy]

Mike Shanahan likes doing things just to stroke his ego and prove he can, for another.

Turning Dayne's career around would be huge for Shanny's ego.

People keep saying this, but when has Shanahan EVER done ANYTHING just because it'd be good for his ego? I can give several examples of times he did something BAD for his ego because it was good for his team.

OK--I'm one of those who believe Shanahan is an egomaniac--so I'm real curious to hear all these examples....

Such as letting Maurice Clarett go and calling it a wasted draft pick. How is that good for Shanny's ego? If Shanny's concerned about his ego, why didn't he stash Clarett on the practice squad?

That's a good one to start....

 

[SSOG]

Besides, if you really think that Denver is in the bottom 50% at evaluating talent, then you know much less about the Broncos then I had originally given you credit for. I'll take anything further with appropriate weighted measure.

LOL. I'll let the facts do the talking for themselves. How many of these guys that Shanahan drafted at theses positions are still starters for the team? (note - no cherry picking. These are all the draft picks at these positions over Shanahan's tenure).QB

2004 Matt Mauck

2004 Bradlee Van Pelt

2000 Jarious Jackson

1998 Brian Griese

1996 Jeff Lewis

WR

2004 Triandos Luke

2003 Adrian Madise

2002 Ashley Lelie

2002 Herb Haygood

2001 Kevin Kasper

2000 Chris Cole

2000 Muneer Moore

2000 Leroy Fields

1999 Travis McGriff

1999 Chad Plummer

1999 Billy Miller

1998 Marcus Nash

1996 Patrick Jeffers

1995 Byron Chamberlain

DE

2003 Bryant McNeal

2003 Aaron Hunt

2003 Clint Mitchell

2001 Paul Toviessi

2001 Reggie Hayward

1999 David Bowens

1997 Trevor Pryce

DT

2003 Nicholas Eason

2002 Dorsett Davis

2002 Monsanto Pope

2000 Jerry Johnson

1996 Mark Campbell

DB

2004 Jeremy LeSueur

2004 Jeff Shoate

2002 Sam Brandon

2002 Chris Young

2001 Willie Middlebrooks

2000 Deltha O'Neal

2000 Ian Gold

2000 Kenoy Kennedy

1999 Chris Watson

1999 Darwin Brown

1998 Eric Brown

1997 Cory Gilliard

1996 Tory James

1996 Darius Johnson

1996 Tony Veland

How about his playoff record without 2 HoF caliber players in his backfield? Should we look how his teams have performed in the playoffs when he didn't have a guy named Elway handing off to a guy named T Davis?

Shanahan has an uncanny knack for picking RBs who perform well for him in DEN, and he can draft LBs pretty well. I'll give him huge credit for that - and there is no one in the league that can coach up a rushing offense like he can. He's hit-or-miss at O-line. But the rest of the positions on the field? Well, take a look above.

Try comparing that list to every other team's draft successses since 1996 before telling me that Shanahan is statistically worse at evaluating talent than the other coaches.Besides, there's more to GMing than the draft. Why not add Champ Bailey, Dale Carter, Lenny Walls, and Kelly Herndon to the CB list? Why not add Daryl Gardner, Marco Coleman, Luther Elliss, Bertrand Berry, Courtney Brown, Gerard Warren, Michael Meyers, and Ebenezer Ekuban to the DL list? Why not add Jake Plummer at QB, and Rod Smith and Ed McCaffrey at WR? I personally don't care HOW Denver gets the talent, as long as Denver gets the talent.

OK--I'm one of those who believe Shanahan is an egomaniac--so I'm real curious to hear all these examples....

Maurice Clarett is one. Switching Deltha O'Neal to WR and then trading him to Cleveland is another. Starting Mike Anderson over the highest drafted RB in his entire history is another. Deactivating Daryl Gardner can be looked at as either a big no-ego move, or a big ego move (either he deactivated him because Daryl Gardner bruised his ego, or he deactivated him in spite of the fact that the media would circle and repeatedly make fun of his decision to sign Gardner). Also, the way he constantly calls the game how he thinks gives him the best chance to succeed strikes me as a big no-ego move. I think the "smart" thing to do last week would have been to kick the 50 yard figgie. If he goes for it and fails, then he knows he's going to see constant derision and second guessing from people who laughingly refer to him as a mastermind, but he thinks that going for it is the best way to go, so he goes for it anyway.Activating Ernster, a kickoff specialist, against Miami is another no-ego move. You can be sure that everyone is going to make fun of someone with 3 active kickers on his roster, but Shanny thought the field position advantage of having Ernster would help him in the long run more than any other player. He was wrong, and he got criticised and made fun of again, but he still did what he thought gave his team the best chance to win.

 

[P Boy]

Besides, there's more to GMing than the draft. Why not add Champ Bailey, Dale Carter, Lenny Walls, and Kelly Herndon to the CB list? Why not add Daryl Gardner, Marco Coleman, Luther Elliss, Bertrand Berry, Courtney Brown, Gerard Warren, Michael Meyers, and Ebenezer Ekuban to the DL list? Why not add Jake Plummer at QB, and Rod Smith and Ed McCaffrey at WR? I personally don't care HOW Denver gets the talent, as long as Denver gets the talent.

I'll gladly add those guys to the list. Where are Carter, Herndon, Gardner. Coleman, & Elliss? How about adding WRs David Terrell, Keith Poole, Eddie Kennison, Robert Brooks, Flipper Anderson, Willie Green, Mike Sherrard, & Anthony Miller? How about Steve Beuerlein & Gus Frerotte & Bubby Brister & Chris Miller & Bill Musgrave @ QB? How has adding Plummer put DEN over the top? Add Garrison Hearst & Jerry Rice, too. School's still out on Warren, but so far he's had what - 2 tackles & 0 sacks in 2 games? How are Myers' stats piling up?

 

[P Boy]

Activating Ernster, a kickoff specialist, against Miami is another no-ego move. You can be sure that everyone is going to make fun of someone with 3 active kickers on his roster, but Shanny thought the field position advantage of having Ernster would help him in the long run more than any other player. He was wrong, and he got criticised and made fun of again, but he still did what he thought gave his team the best chance to win.

Yeah, that was a great move. Activate a 3rd kicker & deactivate your 3rd RB - and then your 3rd K can't get the ball past the 10 yd line when he manages to keep it inbounds, while you're #2 RB can't even gain a yard on half of his carries, and there's no where to turn with your #1 RB out after 2 series. Great example.And what about his 3rd QB? Oh, that's right, he's not carrying a 3rd QB - he'd rather carry 3 Ks instead. If Plummer goes down, DEN gets a 2nd year kid at QB who was on the practice squad last year (and no one was interested in claiming) & couldn't throw the football straight in college.There's some coaching decisions to be proud of.

 

[Jim Otto]

As far as our scoring system, pretty standard 1 point per 20 yards rushing and receiving. -1 for the fumble lost. 3 points total.

This is about as far from "standard" as anything I've played under (been playing since 98 and commish of a $150 per owner, 12 teamer for 4 years)."Standard Scoring" would give Mr. Anderson 7 points, 90 total yards and -2 for the fumble. Not a great day but a lot better than 3.

------------------------------------

I for one, love the fact that SSOG is standing by his prediction. Right or wrong come the end of the year, he has the balls to not cave into the that can float in the Sharkpool.

Guys like SSOG are why I come back here year after year.

 

[Eagle Eye]

...but your claims of Anderson being a stud don't seem very likely given that a) there are 3 viable RB's in Denver b) He is gimpy and c) The Denver organization is high on Dayne, high enough that he will vulture carries in every game from here on out and d) his 3 total points in 2 games.

Maybe not, but like I said, at least I'm going out on a limb and making projections.

The problem is that you've been talking about your projections for Anderson as if they are gospel and should be completely obvious to anyone paying attention. This is the first time you've acknowleged that you're out on that limb with what you're saying.I really liked you're posts about Denver's track record running against the 3-4 compared to the 4-3 and I'll be paying close attention to that, btw.

 

[HULLOBUDMAN]

Maybe.  Just maybe it's the part where he says:

"I can't tell you exactly what our plan is. We have to decide it ourselves."

I feel like that's just coachspeak. The relevant information that I took away from that article was that Anderson was the starter, and Bell is the primary backup if he's healthy. I now look at how Denver's starter and backup traditionally perform, and I project how many carries each is going to get.I'll be shocked if, barring setback, Anderson gets fewer than the 15 carries he had vs. San Diego.

What I can not understand is how "I can't tell you exactly what our plan is. WE have to decide it ourselves." is coach speak. But the part where he says Anderson is the starting runningback couldn't be coachspeak. This has been my point the whole time. You can never trust what Shanny says. That is what leaves all this debate on the situation.SSOG, I am not busting on you at all. Although I disagree with your stance and I think Dayne will at least get a shot, you have defended your position and not gone with the popular FBG's flavor of the day.

I do have to say I hope you are wrong.

 

[ffnut]

I hate to be the voice of reason in all this, but the bottom line in all this is there isn't a stud runningback in Denver this season.  None of these guys are franchise back material and so nobody will get star treatment or unquestioned loyalty from the coaching staff based on past performance.  It's a crap shoot from a fantasy perspective and the back that plays the best over the next few games will probably be named the starter. 

Place a bet on your favorite player, but this is going to be decided on the field of play and nothing Pony Boy, SSOG, or anybody on this board says will matter until that plays itself out.

Blasphemy. There is still a stud RB in Denver. His name is Mike Anderson.I'm tired of making my arguements over and over again, so I just sigged it. We'll all see how it works out in the long run.

These kind of comments will hurt your credibility in the Shark Pool SSOG. Stud RB's don't spend the bulk of their careers at fullback. Stud runningbacks don't start just 38 out of 61 games in their career. I like Mike Anderson. He is a good player and a serviceable starter at this stage in his career, but he isn't a stud.

Reuben Droughns was the #14 fantasy RB in 12 games. Clinton Portis was always top 5 in Denver. Mike Anderson was himself the #5 RB in fantasy football in 2000 (despite only getting 12 starts).Is Mike Anderson a stud in NFL terms? No way. Is Mike Anderson Denver's starting RB? Absolutely. Is Denver's starting RB a stud in fantasy terms? ABSOLUTELY.

If these claims hurt my credibility, then so be it. I'll make sure next time that none of my projections deviate so much as a point from what Footballguys tells me I should think.

Again, I'm going out on a limb here and opening myself up to public ridicule. I'm not doing that just to get a reaction, I'm doing that because I think I'm right. Who cares about someone who predicts that Peyton Manning will be a top 3 QB? Where's the danger in that prediction? I want a guy who will actually predict the SURPRISES.

If someone predicted SD would be 12-4 last offseason, you'd probably say they were just hurting their credibility. Me, I'd say "interesting" and wait to see how it played out. And in the end, they would have been the boldest and best prognosticator out of the whole bunch. Anyone can predict the sure things. I want to see someone predict the surprises.

If you honestly think Sunquist is making any decisions regarding selcting players on/off the Broncos roster, you know much less about the Broncos than I had originally given you credit for. I'll take anything further with appropriate weighted measure.

He is the GM, isn't he? From everything I've read, Sundquist makes the recommendations and Shanahan makes the final decisions. Still, you can't discount the fact that Denver's personnel decisions have slipped ever since Sundquist started making the recommendations.Besides, if you really think that Denver is in the bottom 50% at evaluating talent, then you know much less about the Broncos then I had originally given you credit for. I'll take anything further with appropriate weighted measure.

For the love of God - I don't even know which of your thousand posts to respond to! I've never seen such man love for one player in my entire life much less an aging, mediocre RB barely holding on to a job. Do you have MA posters all over your room in your parent's basement? Get a grip man - you are taking "Fantasy" to a disturbing new level.

 

[SSOG]

I'll gladly add those guys to the list. Where are Carter, Herndon, Gardner. Coleman, & Elliss? How about adding WRs David Terrell, Keith Poole, Eddie Kennison, Robert Brooks, Flipper Anderson, Willie Green, Mike Sherrard, & Anthony Miller? How about Steve Beuerlein & Gus Frerotte & Bubby Brister & Chris Miller & Bill Musgrave @ QB? How has adding Plummer put DEN over the top? Add Garrison Hearst & Jerry Rice, too. School's still out on Warren, but so far he's had what - 2 tackles & 0 sacks in 2 games? How are Myers' stats piling up?

Okay, here's what it comes down to. I think coaching is all well and good, but I think, given two teams, and all other things being equal, the more talented team is going to win four times out of five. Or maybe nine times out of ten. Or seven times out of ten, the exact number isn't important, what's important is that the more talented team usually wins the game.Do you disagree with this premise?

If you do NOT disagree with this premise, then you have to think that Shanahan is one of the top 50% of GMs, because Denver wins more games than it loses. Is he top 5? He was for a time, but at the moment? No, I don't think so. Is he bottom 16? Absolutely not. He's had one losing season in 10 years, despite playing in a very competitive division of a very competitive conference. That tells me that his team has enough talent to compete with anyone, which tells me that he's not nearly as bad of a GM as everyone makes him out to be.

Activating Ernster, a kickoff specialist, against Miami is another no-ego move. You can be sure that everyone is going to make fun of someone with 3 active kickers on his roster, but Shanny thought the field position advantage of having Ernster would help him in the long run more than any other player. He was wrong, and he got criticised and made fun of again, but he still did what he thought gave his team the best chance to win.

Yeah, that was a great move. Activate a 3rd kicker & deactivate your 3rd RB - and then your 3rd K can't get the ball past the 10 yd line when he manages to keep it inbounds, while you're #2 RB can't even gain a yard on half of his carries, and there's no where to turn with your #1 RB out after 2 series. Great example.And what about his 3rd QB? Oh, that's right, he's not carrying a 3rd QB - he'd rather carry 3 Ks instead. If Plummer goes down, DEN gets a 2nd year kid at QB who was on the practice squad last year (and no one was interested in claiming) & couldn't throw the football straight in college.

There's some coaching decisions to be proud of.

Did I say that those were great coaching decisions? No. I said that they were examples of how he doesn't always just do whatever gives his ego the biggest stroke. He knew fully well that all sorts of armchair QBs would second-guess him activating his rookie kickoff guy... and he did it anyway, because he thought it gave his team the best chance to win. And he was wrong. But he opened himself up to criticism because he thought it helped his team- whether he was right or not. I don't see how you can call that an ego move.Besides, I don't think it was that horrible of a coaching move. You activate 45 people on game day. Let's say that rookie really lived up to his billing and got a touchback on every single kickoff. And let's say having Saurbrun kick every time would have given Miami the ball, on average on the 25 yard line. Let's say he expected Denver to score at least 3 times. That means he expected Ernster to be worth an extra 20 yards worth of field position (5 yards per kickoff, 4 kickoffs, do the math). Name for me one other guy who the coach might be tempted to activate with the 45th spot who would be worth 20 yards of field position during a game. You aren't going to come up with many.

Now, in this instance, it backfired, although I think he was hurt a lot more from having only 4 CBs active than he was from only having 2 RBs active.

The problem is that you've been talking about your projections for Anderson as if they are gospel and should be completely obvious to anyone paying attention. This is the first time you've acknowleged that you're out on that limb with what you're saying.

I really liked you're posts about Denver's track record running against the 3-4 compared to the 4-3 and I'll be paying close attention to that, btw.

It's completely obvious to ME that this is how it is. Other people are welcome to disagree. It's completely obvious to me that Marc Bulger will produce around Donovan McNabb/Daunte Culpepper levels. It's completely obvious to me that Priest Holmes is a first round RB. In the same way, it's completely obvious to me that Mike Anderson is a stud. Could I be wrong? Sure, I have been before. I'm fallible just like everyone else. A year ago, it was completely obvious to FBG that Kevan Barlow was a top-10 RB, and we all know how that turned out.Is my prediction a popular one? Of course not. I don't know that I expected that it would be. If nobody made predictions that were unpopular, though, then I never would have targeted Anderson in the 12th-13th in July, and Switz never would have asked if Anquan Boldin was the next Randy Moss.

What I can not understand is how "I can't tell you exactly what our plan is. WE have to decide it ourselves." is coach speak. But the part where he says Anderson is the starting runningback couldn't be coachspeak. This has been my point the whole time. You can never trust what Shanny says. That is what leaves all this debate on the situation.

SSOG, I am not busting on you at all. Although I disagree with your stance and I think Dayne will at least get a shot, you have defended your position and not gone with the popular FBG's flavor of the day.

I do have to say I hope you are wrong.

It's just from what I've seen of the Denver rushing situation. Shanny says flat out that Anderson is the starter. I know, historically, what the starting RB in Denver is worth... so I project that that's what Mike Anderson is worth. Sort of like if Johnson becomes the starter in KC. You just predict the KC RB's historical averages for Larry Johnson.

For the love of God - I don't even know which of your thousand posts to respond to! I've never seen such man love for one player in my entire life much less an aging, mediocre RB barely holding on to a job. Do you have MA posters all over your room in your parent's basement? Get a grip man - you are taking "Fantasy" to a disturbing new level.

It's not this manlove of one player. It's me calling the Denver rushing situation as I see it, which I've been doing since July, when I started predicting that Anderson would win the starting job outright. Or August, when I started predicting Dayne would very likely be the primary backup over Bell.That's the thing most people don't understand. They think I'm down on Dayne. I'm not down on Dayne, I was one of the first people to start pimping Dayne, back when it wasn't cool to be a Ron Dayne fan. I'm not down on Dayne at all. I just think that Mike Anderson is the starting RB in Denver, and I think the starting RB in Denver is a top 10 back. Simple, really.

 

[Banger]

It's a good week for Dayne to get a bigger workload, as he's facing KC at home in Denver.  Anyone remember what little man Griffin did last year?

This could be the cheapest the Dayne will be for the rest of the season.  He is worth the gamble?  Yes.  Does that mean he will break out and replace Anderson as the starter?  No, but it is possible....so possible in fact that I'm not going to miss out just in case.

Edited to add - I was a Dayne hater last year, but I like his situation in Denver.

I posted this in one of the other 20 Dayne threads. What in this stat line makes you think anyone will light up the Chiefs D?Curtis Martin 20-57 3-20

Lamont Jordan 15-59 6-32

KC's Defense is looking much better, and believe me, I don't think they are a lock to repeat what they did last year. I do think it is very possible though that they get their running game going this week. For Dayne, it's about opportunity. 1. Denver has a good rushing history against the Chiefs.

2. Anderson hasn't gotten the job done in the first two weeks.

3. Bell is dinged up.

4. Dayne is going to get a bigger workload.

Now, in no way am I saying Dayne is a lock for success this week, but the opportunity is there. If you are looking for a RB to take a risk with, Dayne is the man.

exactly. At the end of the day production will win out and it appears that Dayne will get his chance. Although MA had a great preseason, now the real bullets are flying and if he continues to struggle others will get their shot. Dayne looked awful good on that last drive, better IMO than MA looked all game.

 

[P Boy]

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.

 

[Banger]

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.

Wow. Nice post. when's your book coming out??

 

[oukurt]

After reading about 4 paragraphs the teacher from Peanuts started echoing through my head.....WAH WAH, WAH WAH WAH

 

[P Boy]

After reading about 4 paragraphs the teacher from Peanuts started echoing through my head.....WAH WAH, WAH WAH WAH

Wow. Yet another relevant comment from one of the true scholars on the board. I see you're keeping up the good work.

 

[oukurt]

After reading about 4 paragraphs the teacher from Peanuts started echoing through my head.....WAH WAH, WAH WAH WAH

Wow. Yet another relevant comment from one of the true scholars on the board. I see you're keeping up the good work.

Honestly dude. Narrow it down to a few paragraphs. Save the War and Peace stuff drama for your mama.

 

[P Boy]

Honestly dude. Narrow it down to a few paragraphs. Save the War and Peace stuff drama for your mama.

Honestly dude.You add virtually nothing to every thread you post in.

 

[j3r3m3y]

This is about as far from "standard" as anything I've played under (been playing since 98 and commish of a $150 per owner, 12 teamer for 4 years)."Standard Scoring" would give Mr. Anderson 7 points, 90 total yards and -2 for the fumble. Not a great day but a lot better than 3.

It is all relative. He got 3 in our league and a decent day for a RB in our league is 11. If he got 7 in your league then a decent day for a RB is 22. He still stunk.

I for one, love the fact that SSOG is standing by his prediction. Right or wrong come the end of the year, he has the balls to not cave into the that can float in the Sharkpool.Guys like SSOG are why I come back here year after year.

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.

 

[oukurt]

Honestly dude.

Narrow it down to a few paragraphs. Save the War and Peace stuff drama for your mama.

Honestly dude.You add virtually nothing to every thread you post in.

What is sad it that you really think you contribute something valuable. Like you are curing cancer.Pony if anyone were to drown unnecessarily in their own pool of self-importance it would be you.

Sorry if I struck a nerve there, blowhard.

Have a nice day.

 

[Big Score]

I for one, love the fact that SSOG is standing by his prediction. Right or wrong come the end of the year, he has the balls to not cave into the that can float in the Sharkpool.

Guys like SSOG are why I come back here year after year.

Despite the condescending comment from j3r3m3y.And this is not a knock on you j3r3m3y. You have absolutely every right in the world to post whatever you want, as long as it's not blantantly rude and insulting.

 

[BoulderBob]

Shanny is a great coach, but he needs to leave the personel decisions to a qualified person. I'm getting sick and tired of some of the crap he pulls, and gets away with. I'd love to keep him in town, but he needs help.

 

[j3r3m3y]

I for one, love the fact that SSOG is standing by his prediction. Right or wrong come the end of the year, he has the balls to not cave into the that can float in the Sharkpool.

Guys like SSOG are why I come back here year after year.

Despite the condescending comment from j3r3m3y.And this is not a knock on you j3r3m3y. You have absolutely every right in the world to post whatever you want, as long as it's not blantantly rude and insulting.

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.

 

[Paper Lions]

I for one, love the fact that SSOG is standing by his prediction. Right or wrong come the end of the year, he has the balls to not cave into the that can float in the Sharkpool.

Guys like SSOG are why I come back here year after year.

Despite the condescending comment from j3r3m3y.And this is not a knock on you j3r3m3y. You have absolutely every right in the world to post whatever you want, as long as it's not blantantly rude and insulting.

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.

This is what I think too in a nutshell.Also, I feel like he's asserting his position/opinion as if its fact when that position/opinion flies in the face of some of these ignored facts. This is semantics, I know, but I honestly think this is a big part of why people aren't listening very closely to his opinion.

On the other hand, j3 and pony are basically saying the picture is cloudy. They'll give you an opinion/guess if you want it as to how it'll shake out, but they are recognizing it's cloudy...this is part SSOG refuses accept.

 

[Football Jones]

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/bron...4094363,00.html

Most of you have probably seen this, but it's interesting that Shanahan said Bell would've replaced Anderson if he hadn't been injured (the series Dayne got late in the game). Also, note where Shanny seemed to endorse Bell as the primary backup if his ankle heals quickly. My point? Those of you who are already dismissing Bell might be making a HUGE mistake.

If there's to be a feature back in Denver this year, I believe it'll either be Bell or Dayne (or somebody not currently on the team, but that's pretty unlikely). No, I don't think it'll be Anderson. I know he looked good in preseason play, but the intensity level goes way up in the regular season & his age is showing, IMO. No burst, no wiggle. He just plows straight ahead & gets what he can. Not gonna cut it.

As far as Dayne, I'm real leery of his ability, but I'll be open-minded enough to believe it could happen (him being the feature back). I think Bell still has the best chance to be their feature back. If nobody steps up, Shanny will be forced to use some version of RBBC even though he prefers the feature back system.

 

[dcham77]

I for one, love the fact that SSOG is standing by his prediction. Right or wrong come the end of the year, he has the balls to not cave into the that can float in the Sharkpool.

Guys like SSOG are why I come back here year after year.

Despite the condescending comment from j3r3m3y.And this is not a knock on you j3r3m3y. You have absolutely every right in the world to post whatever you want, as long as it's not blantantly rude and insulting.

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.

This is what I think too in a nutshell.Also, I feel like he's asserting his position/opinion as if its fact when that position/opinion flies in the face of some of these ignored facts. This is semantics, I know, but I honestly think this is a big part of why people aren't listening very closely to his opinion.

On the other hand, j3 and pony are basically saying the picture is cloudy. They'll give you an opinion/guess if you want it as to how it'll shake out, but they are recognizing it's cloudy...this is part SSOG refuses accept.

Ok, what are those opinions/guesses? All I see them do is argue with him about the merits of Anderson, while offering nothing except "the magic 8-Ball says try again later." That is weak. Anyone playing this game can tell it is cloudy. SSOG attempts to see through the fog, while others only walk around aimlessly in it. His point is that, to him, it is not cloudy. He believes Shanny when he says MA is the starter. Personally, I don't see why most don't.Oh, and "Dayne/Bell will get his/her shot" does not qualify. Give me your guy and back it up. The limb awaits...

 

[j3r3m3y]

Ok, what are those opinions/guesses? All I see them do is argue with him about the merits of Anderson, while offering nothing except "the magic 8-Ball says try again later." That is weak. Anyone playing this game can tell it is cloudy. SSOG attempts to see through the fog, while others only walk around aimlessly in it. His point is that, to him, it is not cloudy. He believes Shanny when he says MA is the starter. Personally, I don't see why most don't.

Oh, and "Dayne/Bell will get his/her shot" does not qualify. Give me your guy and back it up. The limb awaits...

His assertion that Anderson will be a stud runningback this year is a guess at best. He has not had a good game yet, and while I realize many players have yet to perform up to expectations, none of the slow starting "studs" have the competittion Anderson does. Anderson is afflicted with a painful injury that will take awhile to heal. Obviously he can play though it, 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?Here we go, here is a fact. When the game was on the line Anderson was not the number called. Even on 4th and one Dayne was the back. No coach sits a "stud" when the game is on the line. I am not saying Dayne is a stud, perhaps there is no stud in Denver this year.

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.

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.

All of this indicates that there is far too much uncertainty to declare anyone "The man" in Denver, much less declare a gimped Anderson a stud after 2 crapptastic games.

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.

 

[Paper Lions]

Ok, what are those opinions/guesses? All I see them do is argue with him about the merits of Anderson, while offering nothing except "the magic 8-Ball says try again later." That is weak. Anyone playing this game can tell it is cloudy. SSOG attempts to see through the fog, while others only walk around aimlessly in it. His point is that, to him, it is not cloudy. He believes Shanny when he says MA is the starter. Personally, I don't see why most don't.

Oh, and "Dayne/Bell will get his/her shot" does not qualify. Give me your guy and back it up. The limb awaits...

I won't speak for the other two, but I'll give you my "guess" here (and yes, that's all it is):1) I actually do believe Shanny that MA will start this week.

2) I think Dayne will get involved again

3) I think Dayne will outperform MA by a small margin, likely somewhat attributable to MA's rib injury - and the carry load will be about even this week

4) Week four will again be cloudy

5) Q's resigning isn't just related to Bell's injury, but also related to MA's injury and the fact that the backfield depth isn't looking as great as it once was as a result of the two injuries.

6) Eventually, Dayne will take over the "starting" job with Bell and Anderson coming in plenty in certain situations.

7) No single back becomes a super stud in Denver this year as has happened in years past, but Dayne finishes with better numbers than the others.

Before you ask for the thought process/support for my opinions above, I'll just say that I'm relying on the same body of evidence that has been posted here all week and all year, and reaching a different conclusion than others.

 

[el-gato-grande]

I think this thead has some of the longest (non-article) posts in the history of the Shark Pool. The only definitive piece of information I can take away from this thread is that SSOG and Pony Boy obviously like to hear the sound of their own keyboards.

 

[el-gato-grande]

Besides, I heard in the off-season that Shanahan isn't making the personnel decisions in Denver. Follow the link and click on "Bronco Billy" for more information:

Bronco Draft Redux

 

[Disco Stu]

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 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...