PDA

View Full Version : Interesting write-up on Broncos "Chunk" offense


Houshyamama
11-12-2011, 11:27 AM
When I started this series I set out to help fans better understand parts of the game and clear up some areas that were misunderstood and I feel I've accomplished that. But I want to get back to more basic aspects rather than some of the topics I've discussed in the past. The first post in this series was on defining what "mobile" "scramble" and "pocket presence" meant. This article will look at a topic that many fans have discussed and debated in recent weeks. It has to do with our offense. Now many ideas are being tossed around, Spread, Option, Shotgun and so on, but they really don't mean much until you put them together with what we see on game day, and that is what I wanted to look at.

We are going to briefly look at other types of offenses then delve into the offense that is being worked in by the Broncos and it's history. As I said this has been a topic of heated discussion so I hope I am thorough enough to get my point across, but simple enough to keep everyone's attention. This maybe my most thorough study yet, and most complex. I am relying on a number of statistics, watched hours of game footage, talked with former coaches and people who have connections within Dove Valley. This is purely the skeleton of the offense, the basics, there is much more, but it would require more space, a patience, than can be given here. I hope this piece is educational, because I can tell you I learned a lot developing and describing an offense that has largely been ignored.

So for those of you willing to journey with me, let's go.

http://www.milehighreport.com/2011/11/12/2553151/some-clarification-is-in-order-the-chunk-offense#storyjump

Play2win
11-12-2011, 11:40 AM
Or you could just watch the games on Sundays and be entertained...

(enter are you not entertain gladiator gif/jpg/youtube here)

Borks147
11-12-2011, 01:10 PM
When I started this series I set out to help fans better understand parts of the game and clear up some areas that were misunderstood and I feel I've accomplished that. But I want to get back to more basic aspects rather than some of the topics I've discussed in the past. The first post in this series was on defining what "mobile" "scramble" and "pocket presence" meant. This article will look at a topic that many fans have discussed and debated in recent weeks. It has to do with our offense. Now many ideas are being tossed around, Spread, Option, Shotgun and so on, but they really don't mean much until you put them together with what we see on game day, and that is what I wanted to look at.

We are going to briefly look at other types of offenses then delve into the offense that is being worked in by the Broncos and it's history. As I said this has been a topic of heated discussion so I hope I am thorough enough to get my point across, but simple enough to keep everyone's attention. This maybe my most thorough study yet, and most complex. I am relying on a number of statistics, watched hours of game footage, talked with former coaches and people who have connections within Dove Valley. This is purely the skeleton of the offense, the basics, there is much more, but it would require more space, a patience, than can be given here. I hope this piece is educational, because I can tell you I learned a lot developing and describing an offense that has largely been ignored.

So for those of you willing to journey with me, let's go.

http://www.milehighreport.com/2011/11/12/2553151/some-clarification-is-in-order-the-chunk-offense#storyjump

Cool article, thanks.

MacGruder
11-12-2011, 02:25 PM
Houshyamama, how would you build an offense around Tebow according to your theory here (personnel wise) and do you see any indications the Broncos front office might be moving in that direction by moves they have made of late?

iforgotmypassword
11-12-2011, 02:35 PM
Great article.... Seems we don't really have the peices in place. We need a burner. I agree that we have a good WR core but it doesn't seem to fit the CO.

Not that it would happen, but would you guys trade a top 10 pick (not the 1) for Mike Wallace???

Ray Finkle
11-12-2011, 02:42 PM
Well written, its rare for that site.

Archer81
11-12-2011, 03:16 PM
Great article.... Seems we don't really have the peices in place. We need a burner. I agree that we have a good WR core but it doesn't seem to fit the CO.

Not that it would happen, but would you guys trade a top 10 pick (not the 1) for Mike Wallace???


I wouldnt. Not because I think Wallace is a bad player, but he is not worth a top 10 pick.

This FO is showing they prefer home grown talent rather then going out and picking somebody up. I think the only exception to this pattern is Bunkley.

:Broncos:

Gcver2ver3
11-12-2011, 04:21 PM
i enjoyed the read...

i read it all...my only small critique is you take bit long to get to your points, but i still enjoyed the article...

thanks for posting...

theAPAOps5
11-12-2011, 04:43 PM
Hmmmm would you say that this is a Little Known Tebow Effect?

fontaine
11-12-2011, 05:46 PM
It's far too early to tell what type of offense best suits him.

This is too small a sample size and right now people are just seeing what they want to see. In the last game Tebow did struggle at times throwing the ball (just like against Detroit) but it was a totally different setup.

Against Detroit he was holding onto the ball to long, had no anticipation of the pass rush, and was very slow in making decisions.

I saw very little of that against Oakland. He was much quicker in his drop backs, did a good job (for the most part) of getting rid of ball under three seconds unless he was out of the pocket (i.e. Eddie Royal TD). There were three drops by the WRs, one route that D Thomas ran inside when he was supposed to run outside. I think he had two bad passes in the game that were all on him.

One where he completely overthrew an open Julius Thomas in the flat, and the other where the was on the run near the red zone and threw it down at Royal's feet on a broken play.

Other than that, the real negative plays came when the Raiders rushed 5/6 sometimes more, and he had less than 3 three seconds to get rid of the ball under pressure from Curry, Moss, Wimbley etc. Twice he got rid of the ball in a hurry on those occasions to where his WR (Royal and Decker) could make the grab but they didn't.

But the each time it wasn't a completion the commentators naturally fell back to the easy line of "Tebow has to learn to throw the ball quicker, he's got to go through his progressions quicker, or he's struggling etc" when it was his protection that let him down instead of anything he did.

If Orton was back there, and the pressure got to him in under 2 seconds he just throws the ball away and he's called a veteran making a good play.

With Tebow, since he's not used to doing that, he'll try to extend the play and then get promptly criticized for hanging onto the ball too long or not releasing it quickly enough etc etc.

People see what they want to see, instead of just allowing the guy to get some experience and settle down.

Houshyamama
11-12-2011, 05:48 PM
In case any of you are confused, I didn't write this. Just posting the link. :)

Cheers.

Archedamian
11-12-2011, 07:55 PM
http://www.mtrmedia.com/.a/6a00e5513d181b8834014e8684e6d9970d-pi

cutthemdown
11-12-2011, 08:25 PM
Broncos would be really smart to have the read option only be 20-30% of the offense. If he could get some plays from behind center that work well for him, along with the shotgun spread, and then the read option stuff defenses would have trouble preparing.

epicSocialism4tw
11-12-2011, 09:16 PM
http://www.mtrmedia.com/.a/6a00e5513d181b8834014e8684e6d9970d-pi

We have the Chunk offense, we had the pocket Sloth offense...

http://www.starstore.com/acatalog/goonies-sloth-12.jpg

Jay3
11-13-2011, 04:22 AM
Broncos would be really smart to have the read option only be 20-30% of the offense.

That's way too high a percentage. It's just a run play. It's all the talk this week because the Raiders defended it really poorly.

It's not a whole offensive philosophy.