PDA

View Full Version : Should the Option Offense be back next year?


Turd_Ferguson
01-15-2012, 01:09 PM
Should the Broncos continue with an option style offense next year, with designed QB runs and read options?

enjolras
01-15-2012, 01:16 PM
It should definitely be back. There is absolutely no point in having Tim Tebow as your QB if your going to play a traditional NFL style offense. I'm watching TJ Yates play pretty damn well right now, trade for him next year if that's what you want (or Flynn..or draft someone).

The thing is, there are guys running open all over the field thanks to the option offense. I don't have a game rewind subscription anymore (so I can't pull specific examples), but I've been really impressed by how this offense gets receivers open.

They just need a QB who can consistently get the ball to them on time and in rhythm. Tebow has struggled considerably in doing both.

I'm extremely optimistic that an offseason of work will get him closer to that. If it does, the combination of the Tebow as a option running threat coupled with his ability to throw the ball will take this team a very long ways.

KO5K
01-15-2012, 01:17 PM
What is an option style offense?

Turd_Ferguson
01-15-2012, 01:21 PM
What is an option style offense?

If you don't know your opinion doesn't matter.

tsiguy96
01-15-2012, 01:30 PM
continue to run option plays, thats a given. dont make it the basis of your running game.

Oog
01-15-2012, 01:43 PM
Should the Broncos continue with an option style offense next year, with designed QB runs and read options?

Haha you don't know what an option offense is do you? Just because they throw in some option plays every now and then DOES NOT make this an option offense. Go take some football 101 classes before you make idiotic statements. I know you keep thinking it is because espn tells you its an option offense but it is really not. People like you drive me crazy, trying to talk football when you have no basic understanding of plays.

Pick Six
01-15-2012, 01:47 PM
Haha you don't know what an option offense is do you? Just because they throw in some option plays every now and then DOES NOT make this an option offense. Go take some football 101 classes before you make idiotic statements. I know you keep thinking it is because espn tells you its an option offense but it is really not. People like you drive me crazy, trying to talk football when you have no basic understanding of plays.

An option-STYLE offense implies that it is similar to an option offense. I think that was the OP's point...

KO5K
01-15-2012, 01:50 PM
An option-STYLE offense implies that it is similar to an option offense. I think that was the OP's point...

I just googled 'option style offense'.

I got 0 hits.

Can someone explain what it means?

Jekyll15Hyde
01-15-2012, 01:54 PM
It depends.... I think this offense isnt going to do anything in the big picture (contend for SB). But at the same time Teebs has earned going into next year as the starter. So if that is the case, you have continue to run something unconventional if you want any measure of success. Forcing him into pro-style is a recipe for 5-11

Oog
01-15-2012, 01:55 PM
An option-STYLE offense implies that it is similar to an option offense. I think that was the OP's point...

Haha no no no, another idiot... it would imply it is based around the option which it is not. It is a standard power run offense that happens to use option plays every now and then. This is where you and espn keep making people think that we use and option style offense meaning the option is our primary means of attack and most plays develop from the option. Stop being an idiot, go take a football 101 class with the OP idiot.

MABroncoFan
01-15-2012, 01:57 PM
I think it should be part of the offense, but try to develop a more traditional offense as well.

winstoncup bronco
01-15-2012, 02:02 PM
Why get rid of something that is a strength of the QB?

The problem isn't that we run some option, it's that we don't do enough of the other little things, like simple screens and slants, checkdowns, etc. Every pass play for some reason HAS to be 15 yards or more down the field. Why? It's ridiculous IMO.

I'm hoping that with a full offseason they will be expand the playbook some, but really, screens aren't that complex anyway. Maybe getting the TE involved some more wouldn't hurt either. We have a ton of them anyway.

Turd_Ferguson
01-15-2012, 02:04 PM
Haha you don't know what an option offense is do you? Just because they throw in some option plays every now and then DOES NOT make this an option offense. Go take some football 101 classes before you make idiotic statements. I know you keep thinking it is because espn tells you its an option offense but it is really not. People like you drive me crazy, trying to talk football when you have no basic understanding of plays.

Fine you stupid ****ing Moron. The option offense ran by the broncos this year you ****ing clown, or just keep on pretending you didn't know what I meant.

TheReverend
01-15-2012, 02:04 PM
Creates an advantage with a multidimensional running game. Removing it would be stupid.

That being said, poll options are slanted. Building upon what we have now and improving in all aspects while keeping the option run game as a facet within the offense are not mutually exclusive options.

Cliffs:
-OP's a phaggot

Turd_Ferguson
01-15-2012, 02:06 PM
I just googled 'option style offense'.

I got 0 hits.

Can someone explain what it means?

Why did you vote to keep it if you didn't know what it means?

Turd_Ferguson
01-15-2012, 02:08 PM
Creates an advantage with a multidimensional running game. Removing it would be stupid.

That being said, poll options are slanted. Building upon what we have now and improving in all aspects while keeping the option run game as a facet within the offense are not mutually exclusive options.

Cliffs:
-OP's a *******

Coming from a dumb **** like yourself that means a lot.

TheReverend
01-15-2012, 02:09 PM
Coming from a dumb **** like yourself that means a lot.

Good one.

KO5K
01-15-2012, 02:10 PM
Why did you vote to keep it if you didn't know what it means?

I took a guess at what you were trying to say dumbass, it still doesn't make any sense, the poll options are also retarded.

I mean, explain to me why we would even consider getting rid of the option?

Oog
01-15-2012, 02:12 PM
Fine you stupid ****ing Moron. The option offense ran by the broncos this year you ****ing clown, or just keep on pretending you didn't know what I meant.

Haha you're so dumb. It's not an option offense that the Broncos ran. If you meant to say should the Broncos keep the few option plays they have used in the playbook for next year then you should have stated that. Stop confusing the use of option plays to complement our offense with an option style offense you moron. Go take those football 101 classes right away, you really need them.

R8R H8R
01-15-2012, 02:14 PM
Poll needs a 3rd option (no pun intended): Do both.

broncocalijohn
01-15-2012, 02:18 PM
I said NO but the poll didnt have enough options. IMO, Tebow needs to work on being a traditional QB to see if he has what it takes to be in our future plans. Yes, it is important! BUUUUUUT, he is really good as an option QB and no need to scrap it entirely especially while he improves (we hope) on his pocket passing. There will be no excuse this year as he will have one more season of off season workouts, TC and games to fall back on.

enjolras
01-15-2012, 02:30 PM
Why get rid of something that is a strength of the QB?

The problem isn't that we run some option, it's that we don't do enough of the other little things, like simple screens and slants, checkdowns, etc. Every pass play for some reason HAS to be 15 yards or more down the field. Why? It's ridiculous IMO.

That's a weakness inherent in a power-running option offense. The Patriots where very typical in how teams have played the Broncos (with the noteable exception of the Steelers).

1. They played their defensive ends in contain. Meaning the ends don't fire up field and try to get to the QB, they sit on the edge in an attempt to force Tebow to stay in the pocket or funnel the running plays to the middle.

2. They played their linebackers in a middle zone. The inside linebackers played near the line of scrimmage to handle those inside zone plays, and jumped into shallow coverage on passing plays.

3. The corners played primarily press coverage with a cover-2 look behind them.

With the defensive ends playing passively it makes running screen plays really difficult. The ends are there to disrupt it, while the outside linebackers have dropped into a zone that makes reading and reacting to those screens easy.

The inside slants are largely covered by those same linebackers.

However, there are some real advantages to the offense:

1. Tebow, on average, has more time to throw the ball than any QB in the league. Outside of a couple of cases where the Patriots brought pressure primarily on third down, by forcing the ends to react to the run and stay in containment it gives the tackles a big advantage (although Franklin did absolutely whiff on a block in the first half).

2. Receivers are consistently open on the drag routes underneath that linebacker zone.

3. Receivers are consistently open on the middle and deep out routes against single coverage on the outside. D. Thomas, in particular, has shown the ability to beat press coverage.

4. The seams are absolutely wide open. With the linebackers stretched horizontally in zone coverage, the safeties are forced to provide over-the-top coverage on the sidelines. This opens up the TE on the seam down the field. Unfortunately, we don't have a legitimate tight end receiving threat (WTF happened to Juilius Thomas?!?!) to exploit those seams.

5. Certain types of bubble screens can be very effective against the tight press coverage (the old pick-play screen that Peyton Manning used to torture us with in the playoffs). Tebow lacks the delivery speed to get the ball out quickly enough to exploit those screens right now.

I really think #4 is the secret sauce of this offense. If Tebow can improve his delivery and recognition, those drag routes and out-routes will keep defenses pushed farther and farther back. This opens all sorts of goodness from the TE position. We need two pass-catching tight ends that can still block well enough to set edges for the inside zone-read and power running stuff.

Its a bunch of if's really:

* if Tebow can progress as a passer (in a BIG way)
* if we can find tight-ends to exploit the seems
* if we can find a pass catching running back that can stay healthy

If we do all that... this offense can be very special.

KevinJames
01-15-2012, 02:32 PM
Should of had "No, not the main offense but we keep some of it as a wrinkle to run occasionally"

R8R H8R
01-15-2012, 03:16 PM
That's a weakness inherent in a power-running option offense. The Patriots where very typical in how teams have played the Broncos (with the noteable exception of the Steelers).

1. They played their defensive ends in contain. Meaning the ends don't fire up field and try to get to the QB, they sit on the edge in an attempt to force Tebow to stay in the pocket or funnel the running plays to the middle.

2. They played their linebackers in a middle zone. The inside linebackers played near the line of scrimmage to handle those inside zone plays, and jumped into shallow coverage on passing plays.

3. The corners played primarily press coverage with a cover-2 look behind them.

With the defensive ends playing passively it makes running screen plays really difficult. The ends are there to disrupt it, while the outside linebackers have dropped into a zone that makes reading and reacting to those screens easy.

The inside slants are largely covered by those same linebackers.

However, there are some real advantages to the offense:

1. Tebow, on average, has more time to throw the ball than any QB in the league. Outside of a couple of cases where the Patriots brought pressure primarily on third down, by forcing the ends to react to the run and stay in containment it gives the tackles a big advantage (although Franklin did absolutely whiff on a block in the first half).

2. Receivers are consistently open on the drag routes underneath that linebacker zone.

3. Receivers are consistently open on the middle and deep out routes against single coverage on the outside. D. Thomas, in particular, has shown the ability to beat press coverage.

4. The seams are absolutely wide open. With the linebackers stretched horizontally in zone coverage, the safeties are forced to provide over-the-top coverage on the sidelines. This opens up the TE on the seam down the field. Unfortunately, we don't have a legitimate tight end receiving threat (WTF happened to Juilius Thomas?!?!) to exploit those seams.

5. Certain types of bubble screens can be very effective against the tight press coverage (the old pick-play screen that Peyton Manning used to torture us with in the playoffs). Tebow lacks the delivery speed to get the ball out quickly enough to exploit those screens right now.

I really think #4 is the secret sauce of this offense. If Tebow can improve his delivery and recognition, those drag routes and out-routes will keep defenses pushed farther and farther back. This opens all sorts of goodness from the TE position. We need two pass-catching tight ends that can still block well enough to set edges for the inside zone-read and power running stuff.

Its a bunch of if's really:

* if Tebow can progress as a passer (in a BIG way)
* if we can find tight-ends to exploit the seems
* if we can find a pass catching running back that can stay healthy

If we do all that... this offense can be very special.

Good analysis. I agree that TE's should be a real priority on this offense. I hope we already have them on the roster. I know that we didn't see Julius Thomas or Virgil Green at all this year, but both were considered immense physical talents, and have a lot of work to do because they were projects. A whole offseason working with Tebow might be enough to get them more involved in the offense.

strafen
01-15-2012, 03:32 PM
Creates an advantage with a multidimensional running game. Removing it would be stupid.

That being said, poll options are slanted. Building upon what we have now and improving in all aspects while keeping the option run game as a facet within the offense are not mutually exclusive options.

Cliffs:
-OP's a *******<TABLE id=post3466464 class=tborder border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=5 width="100%" align=center><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ff0000 1px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #ff0000 1px solid; BORDER-TOP: #ff0000 1px solid; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; BORDER-RIGHT: #ff0000 0px solid" class=thead><!-- status icon and date -->http://www.orangemane.com/BB/images/statusicon/post_old.gif 01-14-2012, 10:19 PM <!-- / status icon and date --></TD><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ff0000 1px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #ff0000 0px solid; BORDER-TOP: #ff0000 1px solid; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; BORDER-RIGHT: #ff0000 1px solid" class=thead align=right> #1 (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=3466464&postcount=1) </TD></TR><TR vAlign=top><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ff0000 0px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #ff0000 1px solid; BORDER-TOP: #ff0000 0px solid; BORDER-RIGHT: #ff0000 0px solid" class=alt2 width=175>Taco John (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/member.php?u=1)<SCRIPT type=text/javascript> vbmenu_register("postmenu_3466464", true); </SCRIPT>
24/7 Broncos

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/image.php?u=1&dateline=1318367717 (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/member.php?u=1)

<CENTER>Start winning or start Tebow!</CENTER>
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 48,073

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Ryan Clady


</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ff0000 1px solid" id=td_post_3466464 class=alt1><!-- icon and title -->http://www.orangemane.com/BB/images/icons/icon1.gif Substance - let's see some...
<HR style="COLOR: #ff0000" SIZE=1><!-- / icon and title --><!-- message -->This loss is dissappointing - yes. But please remember that this forum is for DISCUSSION not for telling people you disagree with where they can stick it. If you want to start a thread, please start it using some substance coming from a distinct point of view. Provide instances that support your point of view. "Suck it if you believe McCoy is a good OC" is not a good way to start a thread. On the other hand "Starting X of Y drives with a run" or "continuing to run the option when it was clear they had the speed to sniff it out and run it down" is.

Let's see some substance...
<!-- / message --></TD></TR><TR><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ff0000 1px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #ff0000 1px solid; BORDER-TOP: #ff0000 0px solid; BORDER-RIGHT: #ff0000 0px solid" class=alt2>http://www.orangemane.com/BB/images/statusicon/user_offline.gif http://www.orangemane.com/BB/images/buttons/reputation.gif (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/reputation.php?p=3466464)<SCRIPT type=text/javascript> vbrep_register("3466464")</SCRIPT> http://www.orangemane.com/BB/images/buttons/report.gif (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/report.php?p=3466464) </TD><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ff0000 1px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #ff0000 0px solid; BORDER-TOP: #ff0000 0px solid; BORDER-RIGHT: #ff0000 1px solid" class=alt1 align=right><!-- controls -->http://www.orangemane.com/BB/images/buttons/quote.gif (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=3466464) http://www.orangemane.com/BB/images/buttons/quickreply.gif (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=3466464) </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

chadta
01-15-2012, 03:46 PM
The problem isn't that we run some option, it's that we don't do enough of the other little things, like simple screens and slants, checkdowns, etc. Every pass play for some reason HAS to be 15 yards or more down the field. Why? It's ridiculous IMO.

just cant win around here can we

last year we had mr dink and dunk and all everybody did was complain, now we throw the ball downfeild and people want to dink and dunk.

Turd_Ferguson
01-15-2012, 04:18 PM
<TABLE id=post3466464 class=tborder border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=5 width="100%" align=center><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ff0000 1px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #ff0000 1px solid; BORDER-TOP: #ff0000 1px solid; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; BORDER-RIGHT: #ff0000 0px solid" class=thead><!-- status icon and date -->http://www.orangemane.com/BB/images/statusicon/post_old.gif 01-14-2012, 10:19 PM <!-- / status icon and date --></TD><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ff0000 1px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #ff0000 0px solid; BORDER-TOP: #ff0000 1px solid; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; BORDER-RIGHT: #ff0000 1px solid" class=thead align=right> #1 (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=3466464&postcount=1) </TD></TR><TR vAlign=top><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ff0000 0px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #ff0000 1px solid; BORDER-TOP: #ff0000 0px solid; BORDER-RIGHT: #ff0000 0px solid" class=alt2 width=175>Taco John (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/member.php?u=1)<SCRIPT type=text/javascript> vbmenu_register("postmenu_3466464", true); </SCRIPT>
24/7 Broncos

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/image.php?u=1&dateline=1318367717 (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/member.php?u=1)

<CENTER>Start winning or start Tebow!</CENTER>
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 48,073

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Ryan Clady


</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ff0000 1px solid" id=td_post_3466464 class=alt1><!-- icon and title -->http://www.orangemane.com/BB/images/icons/icon1.gif Substance - let's see some...
<HR style="COLOR: #ff0000" SIZE=1><!-- / icon and title --><!-- message -->This loss is dissappointing - yes. But please remember that this forum is for DISCUSSION not for telling people you disagree with where they can stick it. If you want to start a thread, please start it using some substance coming from a distinct point of view. Provide instances that support your point of view. "Suck it if you believe McCoy is a good OC" is not a good way to start a thread. On the other hand "Starting X of Y drives with a run" or "continuing to run the option when it was clear they had the speed to sniff it out and run it down" is.

Let's see some substance...
<!-- / message --></TD></TR><TR><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ff0000 1px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #ff0000 1px solid; BORDER-TOP: #ff0000 0px solid; BORDER-RIGHT: #ff0000 0px solid" class=alt2>http://www.orangemane.com/BB/images/statusicon/user_offline.gif http://www.orangemane.com/BB/images/buttons/reputation.gif (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/reputation.php?p=3466464)<SCRIPT type=text/javascript> vbrep_register("3466464")</SCRIPT> http://www.orangemane.com/BB/images/buttons/report.gif (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/report.php?p=3466464) </TD><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ff0000 1px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #ff0000 0px solid; BORDER-TOP: #ff0000 0px solid; BORDER-RIGHT: #ff0000 1px solid" class=alt1 align=right><!-- controls -->http://www.orangemane.com/BB/images/buttons/quote.gif (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=3466464) http://www.orangemane.com/BB/images/buttons/quickreply.gif (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=3466464) </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Ok

1. So many DESIGNED runs by Tebow will eventually end in him being injured. It happens to everyone. Referees treat Tebow different than most QBs he gets creamed by defenses and the refs won't protect him because he is used like a running back a lot. If he is the guy we are going to go with I wish his running would be set up by the success of the teams running backs and the passing game, not the other way around.

2. Tebow has been at best an average passer. I think they need to concentrate SOLELY on improving this aspect of his game not worrying about installing an offense that depends on him playing a major role in the Power running game, or option or whatever you want to call the offense they ran this year. He knows how to be a runner he needs to learn to be a passer.

3. How much time do they want to invest in an offense that struggled to score most of the season, and appeared to be completely shut down several times this season? I would like to see a strong running game, that relies on play action, bootlegs, and a mobile QB, not an offense that relies on a QB that is a bruising runner.

Hamrob
01-15-2012, 05:09 PM
I think they should keep the zone option in the playbook and utilize where its beneficial to do so.

However, if this team ever wants to get back to the Super Bowl, they are going to have to learn how to balance out the offense and find the ability to keep up with the likes of Brady, Rogers, Manning and the rest of the top 10 QB's in this league.

I think that you have to be at least 50-50 run to pass in this league. I really don't see them going far, if they are 40-60 run to pass.

They need to start utilizing the TE down the middle more and Tebow has to start throwing to all areas of the field. There are really 9 zones on a football field and Tebow utilzes only 3-4...to his left and deep...that's it.

They are going to have to work with Tebow to get the ball out quicker....both, by reading coverages quicker and shortening up his release. I'm not concerned with him fumbling because of the release..but, when it takes you that long to bring the ball up and get it out...it gives the DB a chance to see where you are going with the ball..and that's a concern.

Can Tebow improve in the passing game? I don't know. But, he has to....or, he won't be our QB of the future. I'll guarentee you that. We are not going to win a championship running the option and only completing 9-10 balls per game.

Atwater His Ass
01-15-2012, 05:13 PM
Of course it should stay as a wrinkle to our offense. But calling it over and over and over and over needs to stop.

Turd_Ferguson
01-15-2012, 05:28 PM
I think they should keep the zone option in the playbook and utilize where its beneficial to do so.

However, if this team ever wants to get back to the Super Bowl, they are going to have to learn how to balance out the offense and find the ability to keep up with the likes of Brady, Rogers, Manning and the rest of the top 10 QB's in this league.

I think that you have to be at least 50-50 run to pass in this league. I really don't see them going far, if they are 40-60 run to pass.

They need to start utilizing the TE down the middle more and Tebow has to start throwing to all areas of the field. There are really 9 zones on a football field and Tebow utilzes only 3-4...to his left and deep...that's it.

They are going to have to work with Tebow to get the ball out quicker....both, by reading coverages quicker and shortening up his release. I'm not concerned with him fumbling because of the release..but, when it takes you that long to bring the ball up and get it out...it gives the DB a chance to see where you are going with the ball..and that's a concern.

Can Tebow improve in the passing game? I don't know. But, he has to....or, he won't be our QB of the future. I'll guarentee you that. We are not going to win a championship running the option and only completing 9-10 balls per game.

I think working on timing and being able to drop back and fire a strike to where the receiver is going to be is probably the biggest thing that he needs. A lot like what they did on the OT play against the Steelers, but on a consistent basis.

DBroncos4life
01-15-2012, 05:45 PM
I think they shouyld keep the plays but, we need more speed to run it with more success.

theAPAOps5
01-15-2012, 05:49 PM
Creates an advantage with a multidimensional running game. Removing it would be stupid.

That being said, poll options are slanted. Building upon what we have now and improving in all aspects while keeping the option run game as a facet within the offense are not mutually exclusive options.

Cliffs:
-OP's a *******

Yeah I voted no as I was thinking they should build him as a passer and keep the option as a powerful wrinkle because it helps build a very dynamic running game and wears down the opponent and clock.

But they have to build him up as a passer this offseason. Not so much build him up but get him comfortable with it.

Agamemnon
01-15-2012, 06:01 PM
I cannot begin to comprehend how anyone thinks we run an option offense. That's like calling an offense that occassionally uses spread formations a spread offense. So dumb...

theAPAOps5
01-15-2012, 06:06 PM
I cannot begin to comprehend how anyone thinks we run an option offense. That's like calling an offense that occassionally uses spread formations a spread offense. So dumb...

Well you are not very bright, so there you go.

Turd_Ferguson
01-15-2012, 06:11 PM
I just googled 'option style offense'.

I got 0 hits.

Can someone explain what it means?

This is what Google comes up with as the top result.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Option_offense

Shananahan
01-15-2012, 06:12 PM
just cant win around here can we

last year we had mr dink and dunk and all everybody did was complain, now we throw the ball downfeild and people want to dink and dunk.
That post is correct, though. Sometimes you have to take what the defense gives you until you can go back to your strengths, and they just aren't doing it. Most of the early passes by Brady were short checkdowns to wide open runningbacks and wide receivers. I bet you could find at least a dozen times Tebow has completely ignored a wide open back in the flat or short crossing route over the past couple weeks. I also cannot comprehend, for the life of me, why this team doesn't utilize screens and bootlegs.

The constant downfield passing just forces the offense into bad situations and has only really paid off consistently in Pittsburgh.

ScottXray
01-15-2012, 06:14 PM
I voted No , but they have to reatain at least PARTS of it.
In fact they need to use MORE of a spread offense, but they have to get get better personnel at RB, TE and the OL to be effective.
I would like to see a more conventional offense, with the ability to actually vary what is done on 1st and 2nd down. The conservative play calling needs to go, much more than the option offense does.

Turd_Ferguson
01-15-2012, 06:20 PM
That post is correct, though. Sometimes you have to take what the defense gives you until you can go back to your strengths, and they just aren't doing it. Most of the early passes by Brady were short checkdowns to wide open runningbacks and wide receivers. I bet you could find at least a dozen times Tebow has completely ignored a wide open back in the flat or short crossing route over the past couple weeks. I also cannot comprehend, for the life of me, why this team doesn't utilize screens and bootlegs.

The constant downfield passing just forces the offense into bad situations and has only really paid off consistently in Pittsburgh.

I think the way the defenses sit back because they are worried about Tebow, and the option plays (that we apparently never run), hurts the screen pass game because the D lineman aren't coming in as hard and fast as they do against other teams, that don't have our style of offense (its not an option offense). But I totally agree on the boot legs.

Shananahan
01-15-2012, 06:27 PM
Perhaps, yeah. I just see an open short field so many times while Tebow is looking way downfield and escaping a collapsing pocket that you'd think they'd try it once or twice just to keep the other team honest.

oubronco
01-15-2012, 06:33 PM
That post is correct, though. Sometimes you have to take what the defense gives you until you can go back to your strengths, and they just aren't doing it. Most of the early passes by Brady were short checkdowns to wide open runningbacks and wide receivers. I bet you could find at least a dozen times Tebow has completely ignored a wide open back in the flat or short crossing route over the past couple weeks. I also cannot comprehend, for the life of me, why this team doesn't utilize screens and bootlegs.

The constant downfield passing just forces the offense into bad situations and has only really paid off consistently in Pittsburgh.

There were a few times that the back went out in the flat and it looked like noone went with them

winstoncup bronco
01-15-2012, 06:39 PM
just cant win around here can we

last year we had mr dink and dunk and all everybody did was complain, now we throw the ball downfeild and people want to dink and dunk.

So why does it have to be one or the other? Am I shocking the world by suggesting our pass offense should be more than one type of pass, or just you?

lod01
01-15-2012, 06:53 PM
What is an option style offense?

The trash the Broncos have been trotting out on the field for the last 8 weeks or so. Where's the option 'get rid of tebow and get a real QB'?

maher_tyler
01-15-2012, 07:50 PM
The trash the Broncos have been trotting out on the field for the last 8 weeks or so. Where's the option 'get rid of tebow and get a real QB'?

How about a full off season as him being the #1 guy before we go this route?

I said to get rid of it. I like the read option stuff once in awhile. The option crap i can't stand and that hardly worked in the last month was the play where Tebow would run to his left our right and keep the ball with a RB or Royal fallowing behind waiting for the pitch. What i think would help Tebow and this offense is changing up the play calling. Running the ball 95% of the time on first down is mind boggling!! The play calling is so incredibly predictable i have a hard time believing many QB's would have much success in this offense with the same play calling.

cutthemdown
01-15-2012, 07:54 PM
The Panthers used the read option as a package this yr. It has a place in our offense but it gets ridiculous after awhile. Tebow has to be able to do better then he did this yr throwing the ball.

barryr
01-15-2012, 07:59 PM
The Panthers used the read option as a package this yr. It has a place in our offense but it gets ridiculous after awhile. Tebow has to be able to do better then he did this yr throwing the ball.

And as you stated in another thread, helps if he has more weapons in the passing game.

BroncoBeavis
01-15-2012, 08:05 PM
I think the way the defenses sit back because they are worried about Tebow, and the option plays (that we apparently never run), hurts the screen pass game because the D lineman aren't coming in as hard and fast as they do against other teams, that don't have our style of offense (its not an option offense). But I totally agree on the boot legs.

Yeah, I wasn't seeing that so much last night. The penetration right off the snap was insane.

enjolras
01-16-2012, 10:36 AM
Yeah, I wasn't seeing that so much last night. The penetration right off the snap was insane.

That was primarily up the middle. Hochstein (in particular) had a really bad game.