Calling Broncos homers

[msaint]

We saw some of Cedric Cobbs here in NE...too little, though, since he was hurt much of the time. But apparently he shined in pre-season (games anyway, camp was so-so). With Shanny's history of RB mind games, is he worth an end-of-bench flier (14 team league) in the hopes that the Bells falter/get hurt and he takes over? What's the vibe out there in the Rockies?

 

Thanks.

[Azazello1313]

if you've got room on your bench for a few weeks, yeah he's worth a flier. you just never know.

[forever in debt to mo lewis]

Denver Rushing

CAR YDS AVG TD LG

R. Dayne 7 98 14.0 1 55

M. Anderson 11 31 2.8 0 5

 

November 24, 2005 - Texas Stadium

 

i started mike anderson that week...tatum was out

 

id say hes worth a spot in a deep league like that considering there shouldnt be much left

[Bronco Billy]

We saw some of Cedric Cobbs here in NE...too little, though, since he was hurt much of the time. But apparently he shined in pre-season (games anyway, camp was so-so). With Shanny's history of RB mind games, is he worth an end-of-bench flier (14 team league) in the hopes that the Bells falter/get hurt and he takes over? What's the vibe out there in the Rockies?

 

Thanks.

 

 

Shanahan has been cryptic about his starting RB, but Mike Bell put up comparable numbers to Cobbs' preseason numbers (M Bell's 35 rushes for 187 yds, 5.3 ypc 2 TDs vs Cobbs' 36 rushes for 195 yds, 5.4 ypc 1 TD) but M Bell has put his yds up predominantly vs #1 run Ds whereas Cobbs has put his numbers up vs 3rd stringers & future burger flippers. Bell also has been used more in the passing game, where he has been chipping a rusher & then going out on flare routes while Cobbs has been predominantly restricted to blocking in passing situations.

 

More importantly, the beat writers here in DEN, Williamson of the Post & Legwold of the News - who are both pretty good at sniffing out discrete information - have not made any mention of any change in the RB rotation.

 

I think being from NE that you'll remember (maybe not, since it was such a huge flop) Cobbs' signature game when he rushed for a whopping 27 yds in 12 carries when the #7 run O of NE played the #31 run D of CLE. You'll also remember that NE was looking for someone to back up Dillon since they didn't really have a pounding RB behind Dillon before Maroney was drafted, yet Belichek - who is supposed to be a master motivator of players - cut Cobbs loose without getting anything for him.

 

In short, there's always the remote possibility that Cobbs will take the reins of the DEN rushing machine sometime this year, but all evidence seems to point at M Bell being the guy. There has been very little discussion in the press about who the starting RB will be, with most sources feeling that M Bell is the guy. He did what he had to do to prove he was capable of handling & holding the job in preseason after being promoted to a surprising #1 RB in week 1 of the preseason.

 

If your last roster spot is one that doesn't have to produce anything because the rest of your team is strong enough, you could add Cobbs' & see what happens. I can't help but think there would be some FA who would be a better or more worthwhile risk. I see Cobbs' role at best as being what Dayne's role was last year - occassional carries when the D is worn down and being M Bell's backup. If you have M Bell on your roster Cobbs has more value to you as a handcuff to M Bell than to just add him as a flyer.

 

Hope that helps some...Just my opinion, but based upon all evidence accumulated so far and what is being put forth in the local sports sources.

Edited September 6, 2006 by Bronco Billy

[Tally]

Shanahan has been cryptic about his starting RB, but Mike Bell put up comparable numbers to Cobbs' preseason numbers (M Bell's 35 rushes for 187 yds, 5.3 ypc 2 TDs vs Cobbs' 36 rushes for 195 yds, 5.4 ypc 1 TD) but M Bell has put his yds up predominantly vs #1 run Ds whereas Cobbs has put his numbers up vs 3rd stringers & future burger flippers. Bell also has been used more in the passing game, where he has been chipping a rusher & then going out on flare routes whilke Cobbs has been predominantly restricted to blocking in passing situations.

 

More importantly, the beat writers here in DEN, Williamson of the Post & Legwold of the News - who are both pretty good at sniffing out discrete information - have not made any mention of any change in the RB rotation.

 

I think being from NE that you'll remember (maybe not, since it was such a huge flop) Cobbs' signature game when he rushed for a whopping 27 yds in 12 carries when the #7 run O of NE played the #31 run D of CLE. You'll also remember that NE was looking for someone to back up Dillon since they didn't really have a pounding RB behind Dillon before Maroney was drafted, yet Belichek - who is supposed to be a master motivator of players - cut Cobbs loose without getting anything for him.

 

In short, there's always the remote possibility that Cobbs will take the reins of the DEN rushing machine sometime this year, but all evidence seems to point at M Bell being the guy. There has very little discussion in the press about who the starting RB will be, with most sources feeling that M Bell is the guy. He did what he had to do to prove he was capable of handling & holding the job in preseason after being promoted to a surprising #1 RB in week 1 of the preseason.

 

If your last roster spot is one that doesn't have to produce anything because the rest of your team is strong enough, you could add Cobbs' & see what happens. I can't help but think there would be some FA who would be a better or more worthwhile risk. I see Cobbs' role at best as being what Dayne's role was last year - occassional carries when the D is worn down and being M Bell's backup. If you have M Bell on your roster Cobbs has more value to you as a handcuff to M Bell than to just add him as a flyer.

 

Hope that helps some...Just my opinion, but based upon all evidence accumulated so far and what is being put forth in the local sports sources.

 

 

Great answer

[AtomicCEO]

I think we can all probably agree that at some point this year, the starting in Denver is going to change... due to injury or fumbles or something. We run our backs to death here, and who knows if Mike can take the pounding.

 

I dropped Dayne (or was it Davenport?) for Cobbs in one deep league where waiver moves are free and there is no limit. But, that was the most I would risk on him. I wouldn't shell out cash for him, or drop someone good.

Edited September 6, 2006 by AtomicCEO

[Bronco Billy]

I think we can all probably agree that at some point this year, the starting in Denver is going to change... due to injury or fumbles or something.

 

 

I wouldn't agree with that. 6 of 11 years Shanahan has been the HC, the #1 RB in week 1 was the #1 RB in week 16. The other 5 years were all changes precipitated by injury. If you believe whomever starts this Sunday (I would guess it is M Bell) is an injury risk, then what you are espousing has credence, in which case you ought to be handcuffing whomever you think the #1 RB in DEN is, since DEN has had the #6 or better rushing attack in the NFL 9 of 11 of Shanahan's years.

 

If you're saying that Shanahan will just whimsically change out a healthy starting RB, I would dispute that and ask that you provide an example of such.

Edited September 6, 2006 by Bronco Billy

[kingfish247]

I think we can all probably agree that at some point this year, the starting in Denver is going to change... due to injury or fumbles or something.

 

 

Not necessarily.

 

Any starting RB (for Denver or otherwise) can lose his job "due to injury or fumbles or something."

[Azazello1313]

one thing to remember....in the last 6 seasons, two different denver RBs (mike anderson in 2000 and ruben droughns in 2004) have risen from third or lower on the depth chart to put up major numbers. 2000 was simply a matter of TD and gary being injured, but 2004 was a season with a wide-open feeling much like this season.

[msaint]

great input guys, thanks. i added cobbs on a whim...it's a 14-team league, rb's are thin as hades already & i had the extra spot, and you can do worse than a flier in the DEN backfield, as they've occasionally produced a no-name stud RB here and there over the years, from what i hear.

[blips]

Where's Big Sack?

[AtomicCEO]

If you're saying that Shanahan will just whimsically change out a healthy starting RB, I would dispute that and ask that you provide an example of such.

 

 

Q. Griffin?

 

But, that's not my point. Honestly... I think that a coaching decision change is far less likely than an injury replacement for a few games, which is unfortunately a plausible reality.

 

But somebody is definitely going to get a lot of yards and right now it's 90% to be M Bell.

 

Still... With the same whimsical "what if" spirit that I drafted Mike Bell this summer in a rookie draft... I picked up Cobbs. Anything can happen in the world of Shanahan.

[muck]

Griffin got hurt and when he got back healthy, he wasn't the starter anymore.

[crispirons]

i picked him late in a draft to go with tatum. the way i look at it is he will be an easy drop when i need a backup kicker or defense, or, make me look like a genius. either way, it hurts me nothing.

[Bronco Billy]

Griffin got hurt and when he got back healthy, he wasn't the starter anymore.

 

 

Truth.

 

And if Shanahan wasn't going to pull a healthy Griffin after that debacle in JAX in week 2 of 2004, where he gained a whopping 66 yards in 25 carries, then fumbled the ball on the second last play of the game when DEN was a chip shot Elam field goal from winning 9-7 and Griffin was doing nothing but carrying the ball to set Elam on the hash mark he liked; and then followed that with a 12 carry, 7 yard effort (that is NOT a misprint, yes he gained 7 yards rushing on 12 carries) in week 3 vs SD; yet Griffin was still starting in week 4 where he got hurt vs TB (after 21 carries) & Droughns was forced to take over as literally the only healthy RB on the team, then he wasn't about to bench any starting RB.

 

I just posted the info above to show just how far Shanahan will go with a healthy RB that he has annoited the #1 RB despite the RB putting up terrible production and quite literally fumbling away a W.

 

Now, if the piss poor RB gets tweaked and another RB steps in & is productive, Shanahan will go with the productive RB - but it seems to take an injury to make that switch. Probably has everything to do with Shanahan's ego & who he has given the #1 RB spot to - he can't swallow his pride & pull the POS if the guy stays healthy.

Edited September 6, 2006 by Bronco Billy

[BigTen]

What is with all this fumble talk with M .Bell? I admit I did not watch him at Arizona. Was he a fumbler there? If not, why do people keep talking about him fumbling away his chance at #1? I saw the game with Detroit where he fumbled, it looked like a good hit that caused it. Being his first game and all I think that you can look past one fubmle, especially since it was pre-season. Please inform me.