2015 Broncos-Peyton's Retirement Party Sunday 1/24/16 3PM ET

Status
Not open for further replies.

pokey_reese

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 25, 2008
16,247
Boston, MA
Congrats to Spike and J-Man. For all that I will complain about a few calls, your team made the plays when it mattered and capitalized off of mistakes, and didn't have any problems with the pressure of the game or the weather. See you in the playoffs, I'm sure.

edit: And I thought that Brock looked great, all things considered. He made a couple of beautiful throws downfield, didn't get rushed into any terrible picks.
 

Sox and Rocks

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 16, 2013
5,826
Northern Colorado
The Manning vs. Osweiler debate really is interesting to consider. On the one hand, based on what we've seen from Osweiler through two games and what we saw the rest of the season with Manning, sticking with Osweiler seems like a no-brainer. However, if Manning's performance was affected, at least in part, by playing through injury, and if he is able to return much healthier, Denver still has to like their chances better down the stretch with Manning over Osweiler. I mean, even if Osweiler is the real deal and will be a quality QB in this league, he still is, essentially, a rookie, and while his upside and growth is better for Denver's future, the rest of the team is built to win now.

Going back to Manning would clearly be a gamble. On the one hand, if he is healthy, he might give Denver the best chance to beat 2-3 quality teams and go on a playoff run. On the other hand, if his poor play was due more to age than short-term injuries (and I think it's clearly a combination of both, though what exact percentages I won't even attempt to guess at), Denver could possibly lose to any opposing team, and perhaps spectacularly at that.
 

Kevin Youkulele

wishes Claude Makelele was a Red Sox
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2006
8,834
San Diego
The Manning vs. Osweiler debate really is interesting to consider. On the one hand, based on what we've seen from Osweiler through two games and what we saw the rest of the season with Manning, sticking with Osweiler seems like a no-brainer. However, if Manning's performance was affected, at least in part, by playing through injury, and if he is able to return much healthier, Denver still has to like their chances better down the stretch with Manning over Osweiler. I mean, even if Osweiler is the real deal and will be a quality QB in this league, he still is, essentially, a rookie, and while his upside and growth is better for Denver's future, the rest of the team is built to win now.

Going back to Manning would clearly be a gamble. On the one hand, if he is healthy, he might give Denver the best chance to beat 2-3 quality teams and go on a playoff run. On the other hand, if his poor play was due more to age than short-term injuries (and I think it's clearly a combination of both, though what exact percentages I won't even attempt to guess at), Denver could possibly lose to any opposing team, and perhaps spectacularly at that.
If you take it as given that Denver makes the playoffs, and that Manning's ceiling for playoff performance is, because of age, somewhat worse than his playoff/cold-weather career to date (most likely playoff locations are some combo of DEN, NE, CIN)--doesn't the argument to get Osweiler (a playoff unknown) as much experience as possible before the playoffs become fairly persuasive?
 

TrotWaddles

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2004
1,554
San Antonio, TX
The Manning vs. Osweiler debate really is interesting to consider. On the one hand, based on what we've seen from Osweiler through two games and what we saw the rest of the season with Manning, sticking with Osweiler seems like a no-brainer. However, if Manning's performance was affected, at least in part, by playing through injury, and if he is able to return much healthier, Denver still has to like their chances better down the stretch with Manning over Osweiler. I mean, even if Osweiler is the real deal and will be a quality QB in this league, he still is, essentially, a rookie, and while his upside and growth is better for Denver's future, the rest of the team is built to win now.

Going back to Manning would clearly be a gamble. On the one hand, if he is healthy, he might give Denver the best chance to beat 2-3 quality teams and go on a playoff run. On the other hand, if his poor play was due more to age than short-term injuries (and I think it's clearly a combination of both, though what exact percentages I won't even attempt to guess at), Denver could possibly lose to any opposing team, and perhaps spectacularly at that.
Any chance this is a Brady-Bledsoe replay? I think Kubiak should stay with Os. He stays in the system and they seem to be rolling with him.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,345
Philadelphia
I'm very curious to see how much Osweiler can command on the free agent market if he keeps up his current level of performance. So few decent QBs hit free agency, especially young ones, that there really aren't many benchmarks. The closest comparison might be Matt Flynn, who got 3/26 with 10M guaranteed from the Seahawks with only three starts under his belt, one of which was in a meaningless Week 17 game with the #1 seed already wrapped up. Flynn put up some impressive stats (especially in that meaningless win against the Lions, but also in the 2010 game against the Pats), but he didn't have the draft pedigree or tools that Osweiler possesses and Osweiler may end up starting significantly more games.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,451
Any chance this is a Brady-Bledsoe replay? I think Kubiak should stay with Os. He stays in the system and they seem to be rolling with him.
No. Bledsoe was a top 10 QB when he went down, and the team was never seriously considered to be a contender when Brady took over. Bledsoe was considered a lone bright spot on the 2001 team when he got injured, on offense anyway.

Peyton is old and fucked up and the Broncos have a great record in spite of him.
 

Gunfighter 09

wants to be caribou ken
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2005
8,548
KPWT
I'm very curious to see how much Osweiler can command on the free agent market if he keeps up his current level of performance. So few decent QBs hit free agency, especially young ones, that there really aren't many benchmarks. The closest comparison might be Matt Flynn, who got 3/26 with 10M guaranteed from the Seahawks with only three starts under his belt, one of which was in a meaningless Week 17 game with the #1 seed already wrapped up. Flynn put up some impressive stats (especially in that meaningless win against the Lions, but also in the 2010 game against the Pats), but he didn't have the draft pedigree or tools that Osweiler possesses and Osweiler may end up starting significantly more games.

Assuming he plays in similar manner to his first two games and wins a first round playoff game against an 9-7 WC team at Mile High prior to losing a competitive game at Cincy in round two....


I think the Kaepernick and Tannehill contracts are good models, though those were both extensions, rather than open market contracts. I think he will get something like a $15M pro-ratable bonus and $12M guaranteed in the first year with non guaranteed years scaling up from $15M-20M for years 2-6. That will ensure that he gets 2-3 years to prove that he is worthy of the job, but allow the Broncos an out after the 2 year mark, combined with 5 to 6 years of control. The numbers I propose would sound something like 6/$100M with $27Mish guaranteed. That would put his cap hit at $14M next year and give the team around $5M in cap savings next year when combined with Peyton's $2.5M in dead money.

http://overthecap.com/player/colin-kaepernick/62
http://overthecap.com/player/ryan-tannehill/717
http://overthecap.com/salary-cap/denver-broncos
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,059
Hingham, MA
Supposedly Ward suffered a high ankle sprain. That is the type of injury that seems to linger for a while. If so, fantastic, couldn't happen to a better dude
 

j-man

Member
Dec 19, 2012
3,646
Arkansas
denver is going to lose in the playoffs unless goodell is bound and determine to get manning ring num 2 from the bench

the only way i see den in the super bowl is KC beats NE in the div round denver gets the 2 spot over ciny beats ciny then beats KC in mile high oh and then arizona needs to win the NFC as carlona can and would beat denver or NE in sb 50

arizona reles on the deep ball or memium passing game and has no running game without chris johnson den wouild win by 7 and ne wouild win by 14

Overall
1 Car on a scale from 50/99 97
2 NE 96
3 Ciny 92
4 den 91
5 Zona 89
6 MINN 87
7 gb 85
8 KC 84
9 Indy 83
10 sea 82.5
11 hou 81
12 pitt 80
13 nyj 79
14 wash 77
15 nyg 76
16 TB 74
17 ATL 73
18 Oak 72
19 chi 71
20 det 70
21 Buff 68
22 Balt 66
23 NO 65
24 SD 64
25 JAX 62
26 Mia 61
27 philly 60
28 STL 59
29 Dal 57
30 sf 55
31 tenn 53
32 cle 52
 

j-man

Member
Dec 19, 2012
3,646
Arkansas
Assuming he plays in similar manner to his first two games and wins a first round playoff game against an 9-7 WC team at Mile High prior to losing a competitive game at Cincy in round two....


I think the Kaepernick and Tannehill contracts are good models, though those were both extensions, rather than open market contracts. I think he will get something like a $15M pro-ratable bonus and $12M guaranteed in the first year with non guaranteed years scaling up from $15M-20M for years 2-6. That will ensure that he gets 2-3 years to prove that he is worthy of the job, but allow the Broncos an out after the 2 year mark, combined with 5 to 6 years of control. The numbers I propose would sound something like 6/$100M with $27Mish guaranteed. That would put his cap hit at $14M next year and give the team around $5M in cap savings next year when combined with Peyton's $2.5M in dead money.

http://overthecap.com/player/colin-kaepernick/62
http://overthecap.com/player/ryan-tannehill/717
http://overthecap.com/salary-cap/denver-broncos
denver is going to have to give oz at least a 80 mil type deal maybe 100+ if denver wins the super bowl with oz at QB

i think denver is going to have to offer a ryan tannehill deal to keep him 5 y 90-110 mil
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,470
Somewhere
I'm very curious to see how much Osweiler can command on the free agent market if he keeps up his current level of performance. So few decent QBs hit free agency, especially young ones, that there really aren't many benchmarks. The closest comparison might be Matt Flynn, who got 3/26 with 10M guaranteed from the Seahawks with only three starts under his belt, one of which was in a meaningless Week 17 game with the #1 seed already wrapped up. Flynn put up some impressive stats (especially in that meaningless win against the Lions, but also in the 2010 game against the Pats), but he didn't have the draft pedigree or tools that Osweiler possesses and Osweiler may end up starting significantly more games.
Rob Johnson with the Bills comes to mind. He got $25 million over five years ($10 million guaranteed), although that was 17 years ago, when the cap was $58.4 million.

The current salary cap is almost triple that, and it's not entirely implausible to see Osweiler getting a $75 million contract.
 

GeorgeCostanza

tiger king
SoSH Member
May 16, 2009
7,286
Found in central mass
I thought Os played well. The delayed blitz/delayed 4th rusher got him a few times but I think Matty P went to that well too many times and their line and Os adjusted to it which is a good sign if you're a Broncos fan. I've said it before and I'm sticking to it. Peyton has thrown his last pass in the NFL.
 

H78

Fists of Millennial Fury!
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2009
4,613
I can't help but wonder if Broncos fans realize they needed a ton of spotty calls from the refs, a rookie from the practice squad to fumble a punt return, and three of the Patriots' best offensive players out of the game (and Gronk out for the final drive an a half) to barely squeak out a win on Sunday, and if that makes them feel so much more vulnerable come the playoffs when the Patriots should be at almost full strength.

If the Patriots are at full strength (minus Lewis, of course), they're going to beat Denver by at least two scores with or without Ware, and any honest Denver fan must be able to see that. If it's in New England, it could be really, really bad.
 

pappymojo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2010
6,668
I can't help but wonder if Broncos fans realize they needed a ton of spotty calls from the refs, a rookie from the practice squad to fumble a punt return, and three of the Patriots' best offensive players out of the game (and Gronk out for the final drive an a half) to barely squeak out a win on Sunday, and if that makes them feel so much more vulnerable come the playoffs when the Patriots should be at almost full strength.

If the Patriots are at full strength (minus Lewis, of course), they're going to beat Denver by at least two scores with or without Ware, and any honest Denver fan must be able to see that. If it's in New England, it could be really, really bad.
Denver was dealing with many injuries as well. Put both teams at full health and it is an entirely different game.
 

Silverdude2167

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 9, 2006
4,684
Amstredam
Denver was dealing with many injuries as well. Put both teams at full health and it is an entirely different game.
Denver is dealing with like a 1/3 of the injuries the Pats are. By the end of the game for Denver to be equal on injuries they would have to be without Thomas, Sanders, #3 best receiver, starting LT, CJ Anderson and their two best linebackers.

I will not give them credit for missing Manning, they probably lose the game on Sunday if he was playing, even a healthy Manning.

Put both teams at full health and the Pats win going away.
 

m0ckduck

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
1,714
Denver is dealing with like a 1/3 of the injuries the Pats are. .
Yeah, it's a false equivalency. It's also not so much about total volume of injuries across the roster— what kills teams is a rash of injuries to one unit, which is what the Pats have in spades right now (4 out of 5 top pass-catching threats, both top LBs. Almost makes you forget about the fact that the left side of the OL is also on IR).
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,522
Maine
I thought Oz played "Eh" .

Of course the idea was "with that defense all he has to do is play Eh and they will be championship contenders."

Despite that idea......they needed some spotty calls, injury and fumble luck, A rookie mistake, and a missed interception (Chung) all at Home in OT to win.

I am "going out on a limb" (it might be a big thick limb) that Oz is never going to be anything special.
Like Tannehill, Fitzpatrick, Bortles maybe...
Keep in mind that he is also playing with a much better offensive supporting cast then either of those 3.

Just cause he is an improvement over Bad Peyton......doesnt make him good.

He does have only 2 starts so its possible....maybe even probable he improves...so we will see if I am crazy or not.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
Yeah, it's a false equivalency. It's also not so much about total volume of injuries across the roster— what kills teams is a rash of injuries to one unit, which is what the Pats have in spades right now (4 out of 5 top pass-catching threats, both top LBs. Almost makes you forget about the fact that the left side of the OL is also on IR).
The Broncos have their first- and second- string LTs on IR right now, and lost their RG during the game, so they do have some domino effect in terms of injury. This also makes it deeply disappointing that the Pats' pretty-much-healthy DL was mostly lousy both in pass rushing and against the run.
 

coremiller

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
5,846
An issue with Osweiler is how he'll do once teams start to have film on him and can take away his strengths/favorite plays/go-to routes/etc. Right now I think he's benefiting from Denver's offense looking quite a bit different from how it looked under Manning and teams are less prepared for it. That won't be the case in a few weeks.

If he keeps up this below-average but above-replacement performance (say somewhere in the 18-25 range in the league), I don't think Os will get a Kaepernick/Tannehill/Dalton contract. Those guys had multiple seasons of being established starters. Alex Smith got 3/27 guaranteed and I doubt Os gets anywhere near that much. Dalton only got about ~20m guaranteed. Something in between what Flynn got and Kaep/Dalton/Tannehill would probably be market. Maybe ~15m guaranteed over 3 years, with bonuses/escalators for improved performance?
 

86spike

Currently enjoying "Arli$$"
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2002
25,082
Procrasti Nation
An issue with Osweiler is how he'll do once teams start to have film on him and can take away his strengths/favorite plays/go-to routes/etc. Right now I think he's benefiting from Denver's offense looking quite a bit different from how it looked under Manning and teams are less prepared for it. That won't be the case in a few weeks.

If he keeps up this below-average but above-replacement performance (say somewhere in the 18-25 range in the league), I don't think Os will get a Kaepernick/Tannehill/Dalton contract. Those guys had multiple seasons of being established starters. Alex Smith got 3/27 guaranteed and I doubt Os gets anywhere near that much. Dalton only got about ~20m guaranteed. Something in between what Flynn got and Kaep/Dalton/Tannehill would probably be market. Maybe ~15m guaranteed over 3 years, with bonuses/escalators for improved performance?
Definitely going to be interesting to see how defenses go after Brock and what he does in response.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,345
Philadelphia
If he keeps up this below-average but above-replacement performance (say somewhere in the 18-25 range in the league), I don't think Os will get a Kaepernick/Tannehill/Dalton contract. Those guys had multiple seasons of being established starters. Alex Smith got 3/27 guaranteed and I doubt Os gets anywhere near that much. Dalton only got about ~20m guaranteed. Something in between what Flynn got and Kaep/Dalton/Tannehill would probably be market. Maybe ~15m guaranteed over 3 years, with bonuses/escalators for improved performance?
I don't really disagree with the "between Flynn and Kaep/Dalton" notion, but that's a pretty big range and I suspect it could end up toward the high end. I'm not sure you can really use deals like Tannehill/Kaep to evaluate the "market" because none of them were signed in a context of meaningful market conditions, meaning a price set through the competitive bids of multiple teams. On a certain level, Osweiler shouldn't get even close to as much money as a Tannehill or Kaepernick for precisely the reasons you state. But what happens if you have four different teams (say the Texans, Jets, Broncos, and Rams) all pushing to sign him and putting together competitive offers? There are a lot of teams that will be looking for a new QB solution this offseason, most of them will have the cap room to swallow a fairly big QB contract, and only a few are going to be able to draft a QB they feel comfortable with building around (and they also won't know that before they have to make free agency decisions). I don't have a strong opinion here but I think it will be interesting to watch.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
43,559
Here
Healthy Pats vs. Healthy Broncos (excluding those players on IR) is certainly not a push in Denver, should be something like -6 Pats. Home should be -10 at least. Denver is probably good for another 1-2 losses anyway, so I'd say it's unlikely New England will be going to Denver again, though possible. We also have no idea how injuries will actually play out going forward.

The Manning saga is going to end very poorly. I think the only question at this point is does it impact them materially on the field. It shouldn't, but you never know. There's going to be a lot of distractions in a couple weeks, especially if Manning is shooting more bullets like he did with Florio immediately after his benching...excuse me, his injury.
 

GeorgeCostanza

tiger king
SoSH Member
May 16, 2009
7,286
Found in central mass
The Manning saga is going to end very poorly.
It's already ended. And if he stirs up shit, they'll send him home. Elway is no fool and anyone with eyes can see they are a far better team with Os than a 39 year old manning, hurt or as unhurt as he can be. I'd be thrilled to see him act like the petulant 3 year old he really is but I just don't see Denver allowing it to happen.
 

Gunfighter 09

wants to be caribou ken
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2005
8,548
KPWT
I don't really disagree with the "between Flynn and Kaep/Dalton" notion, but that's a pretty big range and I suspect it could end up toward the high end. I'm not sure you can really use deals like Tannehill/Kaep to evaluate the "market" because none of them were signed in a context of meaningful market conditions, meaning a price set through the competitive bids of multiple teams. On a certain level, Osweiler shouldn't get even close to as much money as a Tannehill or Kaepernick for precisely the reasons you state. But what happens if you have four different teams (say the Texans, Jets, Broncos, and Rams) all pushing to sign him and putting together competitive offers? There are a lot of teams that will be looking for a new QB solution this offseason, most of them will have the cap room to swallow a fairly big QB contract, and only a few are going to be able to draft a QB they feel comfortable with building around (and they also won't know that before they have to make free agency decisions). I don't have a strong opinion here but I think it will be interesting to watch.

You hit on it, and I already said it, but the Tanny and Kaepernick deals were extensions signed before the players hit the open market. Osweiler is going to the open market, unless the Broncos are good with Von Miller being a Raider. There is a very good chance that a 26 year old QB with a playoff win is going to have a huge market when the alternatives are guys who have already failed badly somewhere else.
 

j-man

Member
Dec 19, 2012
3,646
Arkansas
You hit on it, and I already said it, but the Tanny and Kaepernick deals were extensions signed before the players hit the open market. Osweiler is going to the open market, unless the Broncos are good with Von Miller being a Raider. There is a very good chance that a 26 year old QB with a playoff win is going to have a huge market when the alternatives are guys who have already failed badly somewhere else.
we will fransicse V Miller and re-sigh brock i was looking at over the cap .com and denver Has 15 million in cap space for 16 but cutting Manning Ware Clady Vaquez will save 37 extra million added 18 Million for von and 12-14 for brock and signing wolfe for 8 mil a year means the only big name guy we will lose is mailk jackson
 

edmunddantes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2015
4,737
Cali
12-14 million may look eminently reasonable for Brock right now, but that has some built in assumptions. Assumptions that go out the window if there is a bidding war of any type for his services and he continues to play don't kill your team with too many mistakes football.
 

dbn

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 10, 2007
7,785
La Mancha.
Is this the point when I just say "Scoreboard"?
Absolutely.

I was, and somewhat still am, pissed about the critical blown calls that went against the Patriots, but: (A) sometimes that happens, and (B) it wasn't the Broncos fault that the refs blew it. Denver played well, and got an important win.

As a strong supporter of the Patriots, the outcome rankles me, but it's on to Philadelphia for me, now, too. I hope they meet again in the playoffs so the team I cheer for gets another shot at them.
 

j-man

Member
Dec 19, 2012
3,646
Arkansas
12-14 million may look eminently reasonable for Brock right now, but that has some built in assumptions. Assumptions that go out the window if there is a bidding war of any type for his services and he continues to play don't kill your team with too many mistakes football.
u are right but elway has like 2 weeks i think from feb 18 march 5 to make the first offer

unlees the Jets Rams texans can come up with 20 mil a year or make him a top 3 qb in $ i just dont see elway allowing him to leave unless brock has 5 no td's all losses and a wc loss and even then i doubt it

he is one of 'elway' "guys' elway son was his roomate in college
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
12-14 million may look eminently reasonable for Brock right now, but that has some built in assumptions. Assumptions that go out the window if there is a bidding war of any type for his services and he continues to play don't kill your team with too many mistakes football.
Let's assume he plays well down the stretch and gets them a playoff win. That's 9 good games. He then has a hammer. They'll will have to tag him. That would represent a hell of a one- year cap hit, and if he's confident in his abilities, he'd probably be pleased to play at the tag figure. Oh, and maybe a third of the teams in the League would be delighted to have League average starting at the position. It is not going to be "team friendly" if he really steps up to this challenge.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
u are right but elway has like 2 weeks i think from feb 18 march 5 to make the first offer

unlees the Jets Rams texans can come up with 20 mil a year or make him a top 3 qb in $ i just dont see elway allowing him to leave unless brock has 5 no td's all losses and a wc loss and even then i doubt it

he is one of 'elway' "guys' elway son was his roomate in college
But without tagging him, it's not Elway's decision at the end of the day.
 

Gunfighter 09

wants to be caribou ken
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2005
8,548
KPWT
Let's assume he plays well down the stretch and gets them a playoff win. That's 9 good games. He then has a hammer. They'll will have to tag him. That would represent a hell of a one- year cap hit, and if he's confident in his abilities, he'd probably be pleased to play at the tag figure. Oh, and maybe a third of the teams in the League would be delighted to have League average starting at the position. It is not going to be "team friendly" if he really steps up to this challenge.
They have to tag Miller, and you only get one tag, so they can't tag Osweiler.
 

amarshal2

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 25, 2005
4,913
we will fransicse V Miller and re-sigh brock i was looking at over the cap .com and denver Has 15 million in cap space for 16 but cutting Manning Ware Clady Vaquez will save 37 extra million added 18 Million for von and 12-14 for brock and signing wolfe for 8 mil a year means the only big name guy we will lose is mailk jackson
Haha, so Malik Jackson is a big name guy but Peyton Manning and Demarcus Ware are not? Manning is washed up but Ware is not.

It's nice to see Denver FINALLY looking at something of a cap crunch with Brock. That Chris Harris contract is Belichickian. Thus far the only real cap casualty has been Julius and the cross-eyed o-lineman.

edit: Franklin
 

coremiller

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
5,846
The likelihood that Osweiler will play so well in the next 6-7 games that teams will be lining up to pay him 15-20m/season on a multi-year deal seems very low to me. Even if his performance is league average for a starter (which would actually be very impressive and should be on the high end of any projection), those guys generally don't get franchise-tag level salaries, especially with such a small performance sample.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
15,375
New York City
The likelihood that Osweiler will play so well in the next 6-7 games that teams will be lining up to pay him 15-20m/season on a multi-year deal seems very low to me. Even if his performance is league average for a starter (which would actually be very impressive and should be on the high end of any projection), those guys generally don't get franchise-tag level salaries, especially with such a small performance sample.
He has an unbelievable amount of leverage given his history--unless he's terrible Denver pretty much has to tag him and the franchise tag is going to be something like $20 million. So Denver's options are (1) let him walk and hope he comes back, (2) tag him for 20 and see what happens after that, (3) enter a short term deal that's so good he'd rather do that than play under the tag, or (4) give him a long term deal that's so good he'd rather do that than the tag. If I'm Osweiler I'd be incredibly willing to play under the tag because, hey, you get $20 million, and if you're halfway decent or better you're a free agent or getting tagged again in one year.
 

86spike

Currently enjoying "Arli$$"
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2002
25,082
Procrasti Nation
Haha, so Malik Jackson is a big name guy but Peyton Manning and Demarcus Ware are not? Manning is washed up but Ware is not.

It's nice to see Denver FINALLY looking at something of a cap crunch with Brock. That Chris Harris contract is Belichickian. Thus far the only real cap casualty has been Julius and the cross-eyed o-lineman.

edit: Franklin
The issue with aware is health, not age. Denver is going to need to determine whether or not they think he can remain on the field enough to justify the cap hit. A lot will be learned on that front over the remainder of this season. The other thing they'll think about is how well they think Shane Ray and Shaquille Barrett can fill in for Ware and replicate his performance. There are a few factors at play.

On the subject of Miller's tag... I read somewhere that the LBer tag amount is about $13M. J-man has it listed above that in his calculation so Denver might have more $ to play with than he thought.
 

coremiller

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
5,846
Why does he have so much leverage? He's obviously a free agent, but that just means his pay will be set by the market. He only has levarage to force them to use the franchise tag if it's likely he can command a contract in excess of the franchise tag amount. The franchise tag amount last year for QBs was about $18 million. Is some other team really going to pay that much for a guy with 8 career starts that hasn't set the world on fire?

I could maybe see someone giving him that much total guaranteed, but it would almost certainly be structured in a way that gives the team more than one year of control. I think it's very unlikely anyone agrees to give him an $18m/year AAV contract with significantly greater guarantees than that.

The Broncos don't need to franchise him, they just need to outbid other teams for his services, at a rate likely much less than the franchise rate.
 

86spike

Currently enjoying "Arli$$"
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2002
25,082
Procrasti Nation
He has an unbelievable amount of leverage given his history--unless he's terrible Denver pretty much has to tag him and the franchise tag is going to be something like $20 million. So Denver's options are (1) let him walk and hope he comes back, (2) tag him for 20 and see what happens after that, (3) enter a short term deal that's so good he'd rather do that than play under the tag, or (4) give him a long term deal that's so good he'd rather do that than the tag. If I'm Osweiler I'd be incredibly willing to play under the tag because, hey, you get $20 million, and if you're halfway decent or better you're a free agent or getting tagged again in one year.
Unless Denver cuts a long term deal with Von Miller, he's getting the tag.
 

edmunddantes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2015
4,737
Cali
You just need one team with a great defense and a horrible offense (i.e. no QB) with some cap space and it all goes out the window.

I'm not saying it's a definite to happen, but I think there is a fairly high chance a Jets, Bills, or Rams could come calling if circumstances are right. If they do, Brock is most likely not playing in Denver unless they tag him ( which means he played out of his mind enough that they are willing to let Miller walk.) If he's playing just good enough that they don't tag him, then he's on the open market, and all bets are off.

The only downside for Brock right now is poor play. Otherwise, he's set up pretty nicely to make some big bucks that he probably wouldn't deserve in a relatively normal situation.
 

steveluck7

Member
SoSH Member
May 10, 2007
3,994
Burrillville, RI
What are the odds that they work to extend Brock long-term prior to the end of the season? It gives them the freedom to tag Miller this off season. It's obviously risky because he's so unproven but if, at most, they'll have 7 games plus any playoff games worth of a sample size on him, how much more risky is it to lock him up this month?
 

CaptainLaddie

dj paul pfieffer
SoSH Member
Sep 6, 2004
36,685
where the darn libs live
Just remember, Matt Cassel was in a similar spot to Brock is now. No, it's not a full season so far, but if Brock can get Denver to the AFCCG or Super Bowl, doesn't that say a lot -- or at least say what some people think means a lot?

Cassel was traded with Vrabel for a 2nd rounder -- and Cassel ended up getting 6/63 with 28 guaranteed before he played a snap with the Chiefs.

Adjusted for inflation and the salary cap, $75 with 30 guaranteed seems reasonable to expect.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.