PDA

View Full Version : How can the Chiefs be predicted for a dead last division finish?


kcfan
07-27-2001, 08:04 AM
There's no way this team finishes under Seattle and San Diego. NO WAY! We still have better offensive players than Seattle and San Diego. They have not a single solid wide reciever on their teams and their QB (who I like) has thrown 24 passes in regular season games. Both teams might not have as many ? marks on defense but to me our players weren't as big a problem as were the coaches. The attack style will be back. Donnie will be raising hell in the backfield and Maz will be starting. Hicks and Clemons will be healthy once a gain. This won't be the defense of 97 but it won't be the 00 Rams defense either.

Gaz
07-27-2001, 08:12 AM
It is not all that difficult to weave a scenario in which the Chiefs finish last.

∑ The Raiders pretty much get a free ride as defending AFC West champs.
∑ The Broncos have a good team, provided Griese's shoulder holds up.
∑ The Seahawks are clearly building a very good team under a very good coach.
∑ The Chargers problem was their O, and now they have a good OC and veteran QB.

On the other hand, the Chiefs have a QB recovering from a devastating knee injury, with no worthwhile depth at the position. We have turned over the entire coaching staff, bringing in new philosophies in every aspect of the game. We lost a great man coverage CB and replaced him with an over-the-hill CB who was not as good as Hasty on his very best day. Our DL is chock full of unproven players, with one guy who is injury-prone and another who has never earned his salary. We lost our starting WR for the season and are scrambling to fill that position.

In short, we are unproven.

Yes, we could gel and live up to our potential. In which case, we could theoretically contend. A more likely scenario is that at least [1] phase of our game will not fall neatly into place and we will struggle with new schemes, new players and a very tough AFC West.

xoxo~
Gaz
Braced for the possibility.

kcred
07-27-2001, 09:06 AM
Basically, what Gaz said. Though I think all 3 teams have more questions than answers, injuries and a few breaks is all that will separate them. I do not think the Raiders walk thru the West though, I could see them at 9-7, the Donx a little more solid, but being as tough as this division is, those two will probably be on top, maybe only one makes the playoffs though.

Bob Dole
07-27-2001, 09:29 AM
Bob Dole respectfully requests that Gaz just shut the heck up.

Phobia
07-27-2001, 09:53 AM
I disagree with everyone. I predict double digit wins.

htismaqe
07-27-2001, 10:04 AM
KCFan,

Please refrain from posting topics such as these...

Packfan will be here any minute to post a page-long diatribe as to why these predictions of doom and gloom are correct...

phillfree
07-27-2001, 10:13 AM
I don't see us as last in the Division but I could agree with alot of what Gaz says except his take on Trent Green. Yes there is some concern over Greens knee but his injury occured two years ago. His reconstructive surgery was two years ago also. He played on the knee last year and it did not seem to have an effect on his play. This offseason Trent has a little scar tissue removed and suddenly everybody acts like he had reconstructive surgery again. Bull! DV has babied Green to make 101% sure that he is ready and makes it to opening day with out any set backs. Smart move in my opinion. And now I read where DV says Trent will most likely practice in both sessions on the opening day of camp. Trent is just fine and I can't wait to see him throw his first TD to Gonzo. Once that happens this team will be off and running.

PhilFree :cool:

BIG_DADDY
07-27-2001, 10:39 AM
BIG DADDY thinks Gaz nailed it. As much as I hate the Raiders, something pretty drastic is going to have to happen for this team to not walk away with the division. They basically have not lost any players with the exception of Kaufman ( who is not a loss ) and have all the same guys coming back. They have added to their secondary with Gibson at safetyand all the Faider groupies are talking major smack about how Metcalf is looking SO awesome in camp. The only bad news for traitor fans is that Wisniewski may not play this year as his dad has fallen ill and he may want to spend the year with him. Broncos should take second as they have a very solid team returning as well. I think that the Chiefs will come in third with a .500 season. There are just so many variables with the three remaining teams to be able to feel very confident with any of their positions. Sure other things COULD happen but probably won't.

BIG DADDY

Still stoked to see new management as well as a new system.

jamayka
07-27-2001, 10:52 AM
I am sooo tired of people and "experts" predicting that we will be last in the division. BULLSH*T! This is a great team with a great leader. The only thing I'm concerned with is how fast this team will gel. Defense maybe a little questionable, but our offense should more than make up for that. And as Trent green can tell us all, anything can happen in the Pre-Season. Gannon could go down, Griese could go down, (hey, why doesn't anybody go on and on about injury-prone Griese? I'm tired of the "injury-prone" label on Green. He gets hurt once and he's injury prone? Ahh... this just in, this is football, every player is injury-prone), Ray Lewis could go down, better yet, Elvis could go down. Anything is possible.
Remember--the Ravens were 50-1 to go to the SB last year. The Chiefs are 50-1 this year. Nobody truly knows what's gonna happen and where teams are going to be in their division until the season is practically over.

F the haters....GO CHIEFS!!!!!!

ck_IN
07-27-2001, 11:06 AM
At the risk of me-tooing Gaz, I can easily see us going anywhere from 8-8 to 4-12. I'm saying 6-10 to split the difference and a last place finish.

We'll likely get swept by Denver and Oakland and split with Seattle and SD.

Our defense is bad (to be generous) and we've done nothing to help it. Spare me the talk of Robinson. I view him as little better than Kurt/Shaw. We have a gaping hole in the middle which we haven't addressed and we're wasting roster spots on Crockett and Cadrez.

Offensively, I'm not at all sold on Green. I think his performance at DC was much more indicative of what he brings and what he'll have to work with here. I wonder how long his honeymoon will last. Our running game is suspect and WR's are thin.

If we do better than 6-10, DV will have more than earned his money.

Gaz
07-27-2001, 11:09 AM
On the other hand, Kyle posted a very glowing analysis of our Defense that should put red in your eyes and gold in your bladder:

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?s=&threadid=17732

xoxo~
Gaz
Looking at both sides.

ck_IN
07-27-2001, 11:13 AM
red in your eyes and gold in your bladder:

Jeez Gaz, that sounds like a nasty infection. Hope your HMO covers it.

KCinGA
07-27-2001, 11:31 AM
All you doom-sayers are giving Denver and Oakland way too much credit. Preseason games haven't even begun and y'all are already talking about how each team will run right through our division like a hot knife through butter. HELL NO!!!

You just wait until that home-opener against Oakland. There's a reason we play the game fellas. It's won on the field, not on paper. The Chiefs are a very exciting team to me this year! The coaching changes... the special teams changes... the QB, RB, WR changes... the defensive changes.

Last year is over. Gannon will have to carry the Raiders on his shoulders again for them to succeed this year. Can he do it? How many plays did he make all by himself last year that carried that team when they needed it most? He's a year older and coming off of a shoulder-injury. That seems like a questionable proposition to me.

Griese's not much better off, since he couldn't make it through a full season last year. The Broncos didn't exactly make any big-time acquisitions this off-season.

And you're telling me that these two teams are "locks" for the top positions in the AFC West?! Give me a break!!

I can't wait for these 2001 Chiefs to prove everyone wrong!!!

redhed
07-27-2001, 12:31 PM
When you do a complete overhaul on any given team, there will be major q-marks. The media will not give any respect until this team actually does something on the field.

I don't think this Chiefs team will finish last, but I love the speculation.
I think it's better when you can sneak up on the league...

htismaqe
07-27-2001, 01:01 PM
Chuck,

I know I've busted your chops in the past for being so negative and I still think you're too negative, but I'm gonna pull one of your numbers out here...

I think we'll go 8-8 and finish 4th. Seahawks finish last...

The reason I'm not on the doom and gloom wagon?

the stooges are gone and martyball is DEAD

I've waited almost my whole life to see a PROLIFIC Chiefs' offense and I feel it's finally on it's way...

ChiTown
07-27-2001, 01:39 PM
We talk a lot about the term "geling as a team". I think the bigger concern is "do we have the components to be a team".

Let's look:
1. Coaching - yes. Expereinced, qualified and proven winners
2. QB - no. No proven experience with the starter. No steady track record. Shaky, at best, backups
3. RB's - maybe. TR is the only proven commodity in KC. While we all hope for the best in the Priest, he is smallish and has yet to do it for more than 1 season.
4. WR/TE - yes, for now. Best TE in the league, veteren & proven WR in DA, but we are one injury from being as thin as paper at that position. Need the young guys to step up
5. OL - maybe. Very concerned with the interior of the line (sans Shields). Anytime you have a new center, it makes life interesting. Tackles should be OK.
6. DL - maybe. Solid at DE, but we are shallow at DT. There has yet to be a significant contributor at DT since Dan Saleamua left, IMO.
7. LB - maybe. Depends on our younger guys, and how well Patton and Bush bounce back from unspectaacular years.
8. DB's - no. Not enough proven talent our veteran leadership. Will be our achilles heel in 2001, IMO
9. ST's - no. New punter, should do OK, but you never know. PK'ing is a joke and will be until we can find someone to hit a +40yder under pressure, and can put one consistently past the 10yd line on kickoffs.
10. Intanbgibles - no. New system, new QB, new coaching, lack of defensive veteran leadership all spells trouble.

Given the above, I predict 6-10. That's generous at this time, given all of the holes that we must fill. However, I have never been more optimistic about this team's future, because for the first time in years, we will have the right coaching in place, and the proper focus to get the players needed to compete. That I have my undying support, no matter what.

BIG_DADDY
07-27-2001, 01:41 PM
KCinGA

Who said they were locks?

redhead,

I agree. I hope everyone predicts that we will be dead last. We have had some of our best years when that has happened in the past.

:)

Packfan
07-27-2001, 03:10 PM
IMO, the Chiefs will not finish in last place. They are built to be between 7-9 and 9-7. No better, no worse. San Diego will finish in last place. I like what they have done, but they are a few years away. Seattle SHOULD be better than the Chiefs. They were most agressive in the off season. The Chiefs made some very questionable, if not desperate moves in the offseason. The two top teams clearly are Denver and Oakland.

The Chiefs are NOT a last place team and havent been a last place team for years. They have enough talent to be mediocre.

But lets make NO mistake about it: The Chief have NOT improved over last year. A competent coaching staff does not make up for:

1. Losing their pro bowl QB
2. Cutting their best cover guy
3. Losing their #2 receiver
4. Not having a first or second round draft pick

Quit dreaming guys. This team has more holes then its had in a long time. A realist projection is 3rd place with an 8-8 record.

ck_IN
07-27-2001, 03:27 PM
Hitsmaque, please, bust away! :)

I'm not negative by nature and I'm not happy to be taking my recent positions, but I'm also a hard boiled realist. We have huge holes, did a total (or almost total) overhaul on the team and we play something like the 5th hardest schedule. The Broncs play the 2nd easiest and the Raiders have something like the 8th easiest.

With SD's D, if they can get any <b>sembelence</b> of an O they can sneak ahead of us this year. Flutie and Tomlinson will give that extra O.

RaiderCorporate
07-27-2001, 03:34 PM
Big daddy and kcinga are right - there are no guarantees.

But for the same reasons kcinga thinks his team will do well I believe they will fare poorly - the coaching changes... the special teams changes... the QB, RB, WR changes... the defensive changes. Too many changes and insuffucuent time to adjust to the changes.

Whether or not cheeves finish last - really, who cares? The important question is "Will cheeves make the playoffs?" And the answer is NO, unless Oakland and Denver are decimated by injuries.

The 2002 season will be better for cheeves.

PunkinDrublic
07-27-2001, 08:49 PM
Those preseason publications are fun to look at but how accurate have they been in the past? I really can't blame the experts for picking the Chiefs to not do so well because there are just too many question marks on the team. Why all these so called experts keep picking Denver to go to the Superbowl is beyond me. Ok so the Broncos picked up Ray Rhodes, so what that defense is still very suspect. Another thing, as a Chiefs fan I am always given grief about how my team chokes in the playoffs, but how many times has Jacksonville been picked to represent the AFC only to choke it away a number of times?

KCPHILLY
07-28-2001, 12:20 AM
1. Losing their pro bowl QB -- Pro Bowl by default. GREEN is twice the leader GRBAC was and will be just as effective on the field in an O he is familiar with -- Upgrade.

2. Cutting their best cover guy -- Time will tell if the 2nd year guys are ready. Though I think a real DC and better scheme will help, this could be our weakest link on D. -- Agreed.

3. Losing their #2 receiver -- MORRIS was #2 by default and with the exception of 1 game struggled most of the season and if healthy may have still lost the spot. -- Non-factor.

4. Not having a first or second round draft pick -- ?? Rarely do rookies make a big enough impact to be considered a determining factor. -- Non-factor... and a reach on your part.

PACK.... One out of three aint' bad... I guess. :p :p

hawaiianboy
07-28-2001, 03:35 AM
SEATTLE

Being seriously under valued this year...
I think they have a great offensive line in the making with LT W.Jones, LG S.Hutchinson, C Tobeck, RG Wedderburn and RT McIntosh.... If I was the Walrus I'd give up my fantasy of being the next Bill Walsh and just run the ball with Watters and Alexander.... I thought Huard was a potential franchise QB coming out of college... too bad he never really got a legit shot as I think he is more talented than Hassleback.... Holmgren the GM lucked out as the Galloway trade saved his ***... He's made some real questionable moves with the guys he let walk away and the guys he's signed.....

SAN DIEGO

An offensive line and a couple of playmakers on offense from being a contender... Freddie Jones will step up and approach superstar status this year.... I'm not a Flutie fan, or a Brees fan for that matter... so I'm real glad they passed on Vick who would have been a pain to defend for years to come IMO.... Their defense is solid and they will play hard in every game... They are no walk in the park and not nearly as bad as their 1-15 record suggests.....

DENVER

They will score points as usual especially if the OLine gels smooth with the changes they made, and if Griese stays healthy..... I've always liked Buerline but QB's that hold the rock too long, as he tends to do, don't last long in this division.... Rhodes does not have near the talent he had in Washington or GB....If Pryce doesn't get help up front... the Donx will see alot of shootouts again...

K.C.

I think Scapegoat Robinson was a really good hire... From what I saw, the defenses he had in Denver were very good scheme wise but very poor execution/tackle wise... He was aggressive which is the right way to go IMO... He does have a much better outside pass rush in KC but with alot less talent at LB... You miss tackles in his scheme though and you give up big plays... The lack of a run stopper at DT will hurt alot IMO..... I think Bartee steps up his game alot and becomes the most improved player ala Hicks last year....

As for Gimp Green... at the risk of irking Hardcore, he doesn't really scare me that much if he has to be the focal point of the offense (read: no bigtime RB behind him).... I know the stat mongers will come a runnin' his 5 game Ram stats and QB-rating (the most useless stat of them all!) from last year.... To them I offer this... 7 total 4th qtr points in the 3 losses (when teams blitzed him as they did in Washington).... He will, however, give you the leadership missing during the Elvis years and major smarts.... Give him a running game and you're in business..... Till then, teams will blitz him alot, especially in one back sets... This offense was successful in places where there was a standout RB (ie: Faulk, Stephen Davis, Emmitt, Muncie) and pedestrian without a premeire back (Zona).... Will it work in KC?... thats the question....

OAKLAND
I think we'll be a much better team than last year though it may not necessarily be reflected with an improvement over our 12-4 record as our road schedule is brutal.... I expect Charlie Garner to lead our team in receptions and really be a factor for us this year and for Jerry Porter to really emerge as a future star... Our defense will suffer growing pains with 2 new (projected) safety starters but our Dline is really deep (remember the name Jr.*Ioane!)... Other than Woodson we have no real "superstars" but we run the ball well, have a good turnover ratio.... and play good special teams so we should be in every game... how far we go depends on what defensive improvements we show.......


I won't make predictions but there are no layups in the AFC West... 11 wins takes the title this year IMO .....

aturnis
07-28-2001, 03:40 AM
1. Losing their pro bowl QB - Pro Bowl by default. How many QB's bowed out before he was chosen as a BACKUP? was it 1 or 2? Green has all the ability Grbum has and about 3 times the head on his shoulders. This was and upgrade.

2. Cutting their best cover guy - Although our two best DB's were our safeties IMO, Hasty was a loss, but also cost us in penalties on the field. He had the leadership on the field...yet the attitude of the highschool prom queen(Biotch!) Crockett was not an upgrade, but he does have something to bring to the table. The rookies shouldn't be too bad and all things considered, if they do F-up, the safeties are there to cover the long ball. --DB's.......worse but maybe better in the long-run.

3. Losing their #2 receiver - Morris was not a proven WR, had one good game and struggled to stay alive.......this just basically caused lack of depth at this position....Mayes signed, many youngsters, problem solved. --We're still good here

4. Not having a first or second round draft pick - I think we got the MAXIMUM out of our 1st.......Starting capable QB, one of top return men in league, and our fifth. The 2nd rounder also went to good use...rights to a proven coach. Alot of the guys out of the front end of the draft fail anyways so there are no sure things (i.e. Ryan Leaf) -- Good deal here.

aturnis
07-28-2001, 04:17 AM
Chargers......in for another horrible season, their 2 "huge" pick ups are not gonna take them from a 1-15 season to a winning one. Chiefs gets 2 wins here.

Oakland......Although I do think they were a fluke last year, I predict they will finish high in the division 1-3. Chiefs split here.

Seattle.......Nothing to ground-breaking happened here as far as I'm concerned, I don't think the offense will produce greatly, just mediocre. Chiefs split here.

Denver.....Lose TD again, Griese moreso than Green is injury prone(personally I don't think Green is at all injury prone.) The D I think will take a slight hit. The offense will be all 'the white reciever' :) and the running game. Chiefs pull off another sweep here.

Chiefs.....Have made great coaching changes. Offense should win games for us. Defense will do enough to keep us in the lead. Green is not injury prone.....'idiots':rolleyes: The new weapons on O should help dramatically, the old 'untapped' weapons (i.e. T-Rich) should flourish. Will win 6 of 8 division games at best, 4 or 5 at worst.

Spott
07-28-2001, 06:04 AM
I don't put too much faith in those preseason picks in the magazines. I still have the Sporting News magazine from 95 that predicted us to finish last and we ended up having the best record in football that year.

KCGannonStalker
07-28-2001, 06:53 AM
Though I've been a huge Chiefs fan all my life, I hate to admit that Oakland will run away with the division under Rich Gannon's leadership. Rich Gannon has it all, and Carl Peterson was a fool to let him get away.

Brent Green is a major upgrade at quarterback even if his long ball isn't as good as that guy that left after last season. His leadership isn't what Rich Gannon brings to the table, but its better than we've seen since Rich Gannon left for Oakland. Upgrade.

Eric Alexander is a proven veteran and will flourish with Brent Green at quarterback and the new offense. His RAC numbers will be super. Sylvester Morton's injury may or may not hurt us, but we'll get to see what Scoop Minnis brings to the table right away. For some reason, everyone is forgetting that we signed Toby Horne. He's a good receiver as well as a return specialist. Wash.

Eric Blaylock could be a sleeper and Tony Richmond can be the man when given the opportunity. A Tony Richmond and Priest Hogue backfield will give us a legitimate running threat. If Brent Green had Rich Gannon's running ability, we'd have more options on offense. Upgrade.

I liked Tim Grunhart a lot, but he had lost a step. I don't put any validity in the "a new center is always interesting" theory. That's true if a center comes in mid-game, but not if he's had an entire training camp and preseason to work with the quarterback. The rest of the offensive line will be fine. Wash.

The release of Chester McCormick was a blessing as he cost the team more yards than he denied. If the Derrick Hicks and Wayne Clemmons can stay healthy we should see a return to a quarterback crushing defense. With the exception of Rich Gannon, there's no quarterback alive who will be safe. Rich Gannon is just too elusive for anyone to catch unless they cheat like the Ravens. Upgrade.

Derrick Warfield was hampered by a bad back all season last year and should return to form. The James Hastings release will hurt as far as leadership in the secondary, but Roy Crockett should assume the veteran leadership role. The overall defensive scheme will improve over last season as will the rookies. With pressure up front, there will be an automatic imprvement. Upgrade.

Our linebacker situation will be fine as Mike Mankowski listens to his coaches and becomes more disciplined. Ronnie Edwards was used incorrectly last year and will return to his 1999 form when he should have gone to the Pro Bowl. Ronnie's smarts and Mankowski's fire, coupled with the emotional lift of seeing the opposing quarterback writhing in pain should boost our listless defense significantly. Upgrade.

Our special teams will once again be special. Fielding an area high school's special teams would be an improvement over the last 2 seasons under Mike Scott. Upgrade.

Other than Ron Proctor, I don't think anyone here would disagree that our coaching staff is vastly improved. Upgrade.

Other than Rich Gannon leading Oakland to another division title, I think this season will be a success.

Otter
07-28-2001, 08:31 AM
My Take:

Chiefs

I think Petersonís overhauling of the coaching staff was outstanding and preparing for Vermeilís departure was uncharacteristically foresightfull. We finally cut the fat and are seeing the light at the end of the tunnel after years of more foolish than prudent signings. The future hasnít held this much hope for quiet awhile.

This season however leaves much to be desired. Green is an upgrade over Grbac in my opinion but heís coming of a bad knee injury that leaves his 16 game reliability questionable at best. He wasnít worth the 1st rounder we paid for him when we desperately needed the top tier RBs and DTs and Dan Morgan available at the 12th pick. Behind Green we have no QBOTF, only 30 something back ups, one of which hasnít taken a snap since Nixon was in the White House.

That means so goes it Green, so goes the Chiefs. Piss poor managment for such a vital position.

Unless Maz steps up, outside of Edwards, weíre very average at LB. The lack of talent at LB and DT are going to hurt the pass rush and inside run defense which is going to put more pressure on the CBs that are young and inexperienced. At the moment we are vulnerable in both the passing game and running game. When you look at our AFC west opponents, being weak in the run defense is not a good thing.

Of offense, in addition to the above about Green, we have no proven running backs and are paper thin at WR. Believing a rookie WR is going to step into the slot position and beat the NFLís cover men his first year is a pipe.

I see us as a 6-10 to 8-8 team this season because of the above and our grueling schedule.

Oakland

I see Oakland as being in only a slight advantage to our situation.

They are on the declining end of the bell curve with a good deal of their key talent and they have little backup in those key areas. WR and QB are the most prominent examples. Behind Rich Gannon, who I canít see making it through a 16 game season, they have Bobby Hoying and Rodney Pete. At WR they have Jerry Rice and Tim Brown. Two excellent receivers, but Rice is 38 and Brown is 35.

They are in better shape on defense with Darrell Russell, Charles Woodson, Tony Bryant and Trace Armstrong but their LB are average at best, at they may start the season with 2 rookies at the safety positions.

Charlie Gardner and Tyrone Wheatly are going to hit us right where it hurts.

I donít see them wining the West because Gannon goes down and leaves them as a one-dimmesional offense and the Jerry Rice signing is going to flop.

I predict 9-7.

At least you didnít get a bald, polish kicker first round pineapple.

San Diego

I like the moves the Chargers made on offense the have a hell of competitor in Flutie and a QBOTF in Brees. Tomilson at RB gives them a heck of a threat with the running game but I donít see the OL being good enough for him to be the used to his full potential.

They are not longer a 1-15 team (that loss was stooge related) and should continue to get tougher.

6-10

Seahawks

No way the Seahawks finish in last place.

Theyíve added more talent in the off season than any other team in the league. Matt Hasselbeck, Chad Eaton, Levon Kirkland, John Randle, Koren Robinson, Steve Hutchinson, and the endless pool of draft picks.

The walrus has had some time to put his system together and I think the Seahawks are going to sneak up on everybody.

10-6

Denver

Easily the favorites in the AFC West.

They are as deep as any team in the league. The biggest area of question to most BBers concern in Greiseís shoulder injury from last year. Griese is only 26 years old. He could still take beatings and come back from an injury like last with no problem. I question whether he did any long-term damage to his shoulder by playing late last season but its nothing a few advil canít take care of at this point.

But even if he does go down, he has Gus Ferotte and Steve Buerline backing him up. Not too shabby for backups.

At the running back position, you could plug any one of the 3 in there and theyíll do fine.

Hereís a list of the players they re-signed or added to their roster:

Player signed Player lost DE Bert Berry (signed as free agent) CB Tyrone Poole (signed as free agent) RB Keith Brown (signed as free agent) Re-signed LB Keith Burns to three-year deal TE Byron Chamberlain (signed with Minnesota) LB Ricardo McDonald (signed as free agent) RB Mike Stack (signed as free agent) WR Ryan Thelwell (signed as free agent) G Donnie Young (signed as free agent) Re-signed OG Dan Neil Re-signed LB John Mobley to six-year deal Re-signed QB Gus Frerotte to one-year deal CB TE Patrick Hape (signed as free agent) OL Ethan Brooks (signed as free agent) CB Terrell Buckley (signed with New England) DE Leon Lett (signed as a free agent) CB Denard Walker (signed as free agent) Re-signed OT Matt Lepsis to six-year deal C Quentin Neujahr (signed as free agent) OL Phil Ostrowski (signed as free agent) DE Keith Washington (signed as free agent) DT Chester McGlockton (signed as free agent) OT Todd Fordham (signed as free agent) DL Trevor Pryce agreed to seven-year deal Re-signed FB Howard Griffith to a three-year deal QB Steve Stenstrom (signed as free agent) LB Antonio London (signed as free agent) LB Henri Crockett (signed as free agent) WR Keith Poole (signed as free agent) DT Cyron Brown (signed as free agent) C Jay Leeuwenburg (signed as free agent) CB Jason Suttle (re-signed) WR Eddie Kennison (signed as free agent) C K.C. Jones (re-signed) QB Brian Griese (re-signed) FB Tony Carter (signed as free agent) LB Lee Woodall (signed as free agent) OT Trey Teague (re-signed) OL David Diaz-Infante (signed as a free agent).

They are just full of talent at the moment but they do have a tough scheduale: 11-5 and SB contenders.

That hurt writing that but at least its not the raiders.

But beware Bronco fans: the salary cap has a sure-fire way of making sure what comith around, go ith around. AH HA HA HA


Sorry for tapering off there at the end but I got sick of writing.

aturnis
07-28-2001, 12:48 PM
First.......the Broncos do NOT have at all a hard schedule.......its one of the top five easiest I believe. Also, isn't the salary cap done in 2 or 3 years? I thought thats what I read, can anyone confirm?

Cormac
07-28-2001, 03:33 PM
The salary cap will remain, but it's set to jump up by several million dollars in time for the 2003 season (I think!), giving everyone more cap room. This is part of the reason that Washington could take on so many large (back-loaded) contracts last year. I read somewhere recently (Clayton I believe) that Denver are going to be about $10m over the cap next year (probably not a big problem) and about $30m over in 2003. Don't quote me on the numbers ;).