Originally Posted by RunKC:
If I was the Broncos I’d trade back from 12 to get more picks to build the roster. If they like Nix I think he could be had early day 2.
Paton has to be operating on borrowed time. Payton is probably the driving force in that franchise now and I'm sure Paton is giving Payton a lot of say in whatever they do.
If we start with that theory as a given, how likely is Payton to sit tight without a high pick QB? The idea of trading back makes a lot of sense for the franchise, but it probably runs contrary to what Payton wants to do. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Pasta Little Brioni:
Even when Denver beats KC...they lose. That drop in draft position is HUGE and the Chiefs still won it all, so that win meant NOTHING :-)
Originally Posted by Mile High Mania:
It broke the streak…that’s good with me.
Bet so. You thought it would never reach 5.
But big picture it set you guys back because you went on a little win streak, based off turnovers that was unsustainable, and instead of trading players, you kept them and you won just enough so you would not be in position to get a top QB.
To be fair, I think you saw it playing out just like it did. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TEX:
Bet so. You thought it would never reach 5.
But big picture it set you guys back because you went on a little win streak, based off turnovers that was unsustainable, and instead of trading players, you kept them and you won just enough so you would not be in position to get a top QB.
To be fair, I think you saw it playing out just like it did.
Then had to let players go for nothing, or next to nothing, when they could have been traded for draft assets. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
If the Broncos wouldn’t have won against us that 5 game spark doesn’t happen and you get to pick one of Drake Maye or JJ McCarthy.
Now what? Bo Nix or next years weak QB class?
You set your franchise back at least 3 years winning those games :-)
Eh I’m sure it will be fine. MHM said the Broncos are gonna win 8-10 games this year for the 69th year in a row [Reply]