Denver's offensive line since 2003 ranked 3rd in fewest sacks allowed.

[Taco John]

Did you know that the Broncos offensive line boasts the third fewest sacks in the NFL since 2003? Here is how the top 5 teams break out in sacks allowed in that time:


1. Indianapolis - 60 sacks allowed
2. Green Bay - 65 sacks allowed
3. Denver - 67 sacks allowed (and then a substantial jump)
4. San Diego - 82 sacks allowed
5. New England - 90 sacks allowed

[fontaine]

Did you know that the Broncos offensive line boasts the third fewest sacks in the NFL since 2003? Here is how the top 5 teams break out in sacks allowed in that time:


1. Indianapolis - 60 sacks allowed
2. Green Bay - 65 sacks allowed
3. Denver - 67 sacks allowed (and then a substantial jump)
4. San Diego - 82 sacks allowed
5. New England - 90 sacks allowed

OL stability and continuity is the lifeblood of this offense.

It makes me feel good that Cutler will have the same luxury and be given every chance to succeed.

Now, if we could just do the same for the DL!

[Popps]

That's what happens when you replace one of the most sacked QBs in the NFL with one of the least sacked.

[Taco John]

Leave it to Popps to make this about Griese, while giving all the credit to Plummer, and none to our improved offensive line.

Doesn't matter to me. I'm just happy we have Lepsis manning the left tackle spot, and not the back-up center. Thankfully, our quiet guys don't need the recognition. Go ahead and give us your surface analysis on how Plummer is the difference maker here (he deserves part of the credit on his ability to scramble to be sure), and not our improved offensive talent.

[Popps]

Leave it to Popps to make this about Griese, while giving all the credit to Plummer, and none to our improved offensive line.

I've been a huge proponent of our o-line for years, and was even a fan of boosting it with higher draft picks in this draft.

Nice try.

Bottom line is, you replace a statue with one of the more elusive QBs in the game and your sack numbers are going to go down.

You think it was a coincidence that we improved that much over one season?

So, our running game stayed very good, but our pass protection just happened to get better by coincidence, or was it the addition of Foster?
Hilarious!ROFL!

Probably starting to regret this thread, eh?

[Popps]

. Go ahead and give us your surface analysis on how Plummer is the difference maker here (he deserves part of the credit on his ability to scramble to be sure), and not our improved offensive talent.

So, you're saying it's both?

Then, you're correct.

It is both. Our line is good. We also have a good scheme. We also have a QB that happens to be good at avoiding sacks.

Of course our line is talented and works well within the scheme we run. But, if you want to get specific about how we improved so dramatically in the sacks dept. in ONE OFF-SEASON, look no further than the quarterback change.

[fontaine]

That's what happens when you replace one of the most sacked QBs in the NFL with one of the least sacked.

Jake was sacked 166 times in his first 60 games in Arizona,

compared to

67 sacks in 46 games so far in Denver.

He must have suddenly found his sea legs in Denver right?!

ROFL! Ha!

[Taco John]

Probably starting to regret this thread, eh?


Not at all... This thread only supports what I argued with you about for so long. We needed help up front, ESPECIALLY since we had so much invested in a quarterback who was a pocket passer, not a scrambler. I still contend that Shanahan could have won with Griese if he had put more thought in his offensive line at the time. But with Gibbs "retiring," transitioning to Dennison (who had no offensive line experience prior to this), losing Tony Jones, Brian Habib, Mark Schlereth, and starting a back-up center in the left tackle position, I think we about shot any chance we had of winning no matter who was at quarteraback. I sure as hell don't believe Plummer (of all quarteraback) could have done much better under the circumstances.

So yes, I think Plummer's mobility helps a great deal, but more than that, I think the stability we've finally found on the offensive line is where the real credit belongs. Dennison has proven a lot of people wrong, and deserves praise for managing to pull a group of guys together an continue a tradition of solid offensive line blocking for this team.

[Northman]

So, you're saying it's both?

Then, you're correct.

It is both. Our line is good. We also have a good scheme. We also have a QB that happens to be good at avoiding sacks.

Of course our line is talented and works well within the scheme we run. But, if you want to get specific about how we improved so dramatically in the sacks dept. in ONE OFF-SEASON, look no further than the quarterback change.



So its safe to say that all of Plummer's turnovers are his fault correct? I mean, he is the elusive one right? :yayaya:

[Kaylore]

So, you're saying it's both?

Then, you're correct.

It is both. Our line is good. We also have a good scheme. We also have a QB that happens to be good at avoiding sacks.

Of course our line is talented and works well within the scheme we run. But, if you want to get specific about how we improved so dramatically in the sacks dept. in ONE OFF-SEASON, look no further than the quarterback change.

This is partly true. I've looked into this and it is both. Griese, Beldsoe, Leftwich - These quarterbacks aren't very mobile and get sacked because of it. Their sack numbers are higher.

Mobility can hurt those number, though. You need to be able to get rid of the ball and know what you're doing with it. "Mobile" quarterbacks are among the most sacked. Michael Vick and Culpepper have pretty high sack numbers - highest in the league - and Culpepper did with the hornheads. He changes teams and suddenly their O-line sucks? Maybe they're not great, but QB play is part of sacks.

Peyton has the lowest and most people would list him as a less than mobile QB. That's because he knows where he wants to go with the ball and how to get rid of it. So mobility can help, but the scrammbling QB's actually have higher sack numbers than the pure pocket passers like Brady and Manning, though if you're too immobile (Griese) or hold the ball too long (Bledsoe) you'll get sacked more.

Anyway, it's nice to see our Line doing well and also see the FO bringing in some young guys to step up. Kuper is going to be a beast and I'm hoping that Meadows will be able to push Foster for the RT spot.

[Popps]

Not at all... This thread only supports what I argued with you about for so long. We needed help up front, ESPECIALLY since we had so much invested in a quarterback who was a pocket passer, not a scrambler. I still contend that Shanahan could have won with Griese if he had put more thought in his offensive line at the time.

Right, only he wasn't winning.

So, he went out, got a different QB, and BEGAN winning... and the sacks mysteriously went down immediately with the same exact offensive linemen.

So yes, I think Plummer's mobility helps a great deal, but more than that, I think the stability we've finally found on the offensive line is where the real credit belongs.

Well, it's not surprising that you'd attempt to deflect credit to Plummer in any way you could. Problem is, the statistics speak for themselves. In fact, I seem to recall us going from near the bottom to near the top of the league with regard to sacks. (Not being sacked)

Stick a QB like Griese or Bledsoe behind this current o-line and this board would be blowing up with threads about how our offensive line is trash.

It's both, Taco. We have a very good line being helped by a very mobile QB.

It's both.

That doesn't mean Plummer doesn't have other faults. He certainly does. But, being sacked isn't one of them. He's one of the best in the league at keeping those numbers down.

[Popps]

So its safe to say that all of Plummer's turnovers are his fault correct? I mean, he is the elusive one right? :yayaya:

I'd say that most of them are, sure. Not sure how that relates to what we're talking about.

[Kaylore]

The time code of this thread is jacked up.

[Northman]

Im just busting your balls, thats all. :)

[Popps]

Im just busting your balls, thats all. :)

Bust away. :thumbs:

Couldn't even tell. Too tired... must have sleep.... must convince infant to sleep....

[OrangeShadow]

The time code of this thread is jacked up.

ive been noticing that as well. ill post and it will end up before someones

[bpc]

I would love to give credit where it is due and this stat is semi-impressive. All I can do though is look at our losses and when we need to pass... more than likely we are not very effective at it and our line is one of the reasons for it.

We can't, could not, could never drop back and pass 40-50 right now with our squad the way it is. If that is just the line, the QB, running backs blocking, I'm not sure. We are just not very effective unless we scheming to make a passing game.

The St. Louis game is perfect example. Pittsburgh last year, as well as Miami. All of our Indianapolis games. Teams know if they can get us down, we are in big trouble.

I won't brag until our passing game is actually a weapon when we are down.

[Rascal]

I would love to give credit where it is due and this stat is semi-impressive. All I can do though is look at our losses and when we need to pass... more than likely we are not very effective at it and our line is one of the reasons for it.

We can't, could not, could never drop back and pass 40-50 right now with our squad the way it is. If that is just the line, the QB, running backs blocking, I'm not sure. We are just not very effective unless we scheming to make a passing game.

The St. Louis game is perfect example. Pittsburgh last year, as well as Miami. All of our Indianapolis games. Teams know if they can get us down, we are in big trouble.

I won't brag until our passing game is actually a weapon when we are down.

Quoted for truth.

This could also be called, "Jake Plummer since 2003 ranks 3rd in getting sacked the least". But that would require TJ to admit that Jake is actually doing something worthwhile.

I agree with Popps on this one. It is both, when Jake came in the number of sacks dropped in the first season dramatically. That can't be attributed to the addition of Foster, but to the change from a statuesque QB to a mobile QB.

[Requiem]

I love seeing the, "Meadows will push Foster" **** on these boards. Yep, he's doing a whole lot of pushing on the inactive list. Lol.

[Taco John]

Quoted for truth.

This could also be called, "Jake Plummer since 2003 ranks 3rd in getting sacked the least". But that would require TJ to admit that Jake is actually doing something worthwhile.

I agree with Popps on this one. It is both, when Jake came in the number of sacks dropped in the first season dramatically. That can't be attributed to the addition of Foster, but to the change from a statuesque QB to a mobile QB.


Bah. Kaylore already proved that line of reasoning wrong. And I never said it was because of Foster. I think it's the entire package up front.

[Rock Chalk]

Leave it to Popps to make this about Griese, while giving all the credit to Plummer, and none to our improved offensive line.

Doesn't matter to me. I'm just happy we have Lepsis manning the left tackle spot, and not the back-up center. Thankfully, our quiet guys don't need the recognition. Go ahead and give us your surface analysis on how Plummer is the difference maker here (he deserves part of the credit on his ability to scramble to be sure), and not our improved offensive talent.

Leave it to you to give credit to the o-line for which something that is almost exclusively because of Plummer. Least sacked QB not because of great pass protection, because Plummer is highly mobile and Shanahan uses him outside of the pocket on rollouts a good percentage of the time.

Plummer has had most of his sacks when he was in the pocket which lends itself to "pass protection". Indeed, DVOA has a very detailed stat on pass protection and how sacks are directly correlated to how mobile the QB is and have a lot less to do with "pass protection" than the common fan things and is far more accurate to say the least sacked QBs are the most mobile QBs.

[Taco John]

You guys are aware that Elway was one of the most sacked QBs of all time, right?

[Rock Chalk]

You guys are aware that Elway was one of the most sacked QBs of all time, right?

Yeah, comes from playing for 16 years. Not one of, he was THE most sacked QB of all time. However, howmany years did he have legitimate run games prior to TD? how many years did he have enough weapons on offense to get the ball to someone?

Furthermore, how many sacks did he avoid by his mobility?

[HEAV]

Did you know that the Broncos offensive line boasts the third fewest sacks in the NFL since 2003? Here is how the top 5 teams break out in sacks allowed in that time:


1. Indianapolis - 60 sacks allowed
2. Green Bay - 65 sacks allowed
3. Denver - 67 sacks allowed (and then a substantial jump)
4. San Diego - 82 sacks allowed
5. New England - 90 sacks allowed


Sorry TJ, but Jake has had a lot to do with those numbers. Added talent upfront? Who Cooper, Hamilton, Nails is on his last leg.

Talent no. Scheme yes. Jakes feet yes.


P.S. Brian did suck.

[watermock]

Griese under pressure:

http://photoshopcontest.com/images/queue/80636715112891fdcf8051626b7bbd558f2f0013179075.jpg

[Rascal]

Sorry TJ, but Jake has had a lot to do with those numbers. Added talent upfront? Who Cooper, Hamilton, Nails is on his last leg.

Talent no. Scheme yes. Jakes feet yes.


P.S. Brian did suck.

:thumbsup:

[Popps]

ive been noticing that as well. ill post and it will end up before someones

I haven't noticed anything.

Anyway, I'm thinking we should draft Jay Cutler next week. Anyone think there's a chance of that happening?

[bronco militia]

Leave it to Popps to make this about Griese, while giving all the credit to Plummer, and none to our improved offensive line.

Doesn't matter to me. I'm just happy we have Lepsis manning the left tackle spot, and not the back-up center. Thankfully, our quiet guys don't need the recognition. Go ahead and give us your surface analysis on how Plummer is the difference maker here (he deserves part of the credit on his ability to scramble to be sure), and not our improved offensive talent.

plummer over griese is the biggest reason for the change....I bet if you do a search of broncos news articles from 2003, you'll find Shanny quotes talking about Plummers added dimension to the offense. For crying out loud, it was the company line from dove valley as soon as Plummer was signed.

[Taco John]

Well, I still think it's a combination and credit Dennison and the line as much as anyone for the improvement. It takes more than just mobility to be the third least sacked quarterback in the league, otherwise, we'd see nothing but mobile quarterbacks at the top of the list.

[BroncoInferno]

Well, I still think it's a combination and credit Dennison and the line as much as anyone for the improvement. It takes more than just mobility to be the third least sacked quarterback in the league, otherwise, we'd see nothing but mobile quarterbacks at the top of the list.

It's also a function of the rushing success. That slows down the pass rushers. Where the pass protection falls apart is when when get behind by a couple of scores and the opposition knows we are going to pass. Now, such situations will make pass protection more difficult for any team, but it seems especially pronounced with us. Several commenters mentioned this during games last season. This is when the lack of size up front hurts us.

[Crushaholic]

Fortunately, the performance of the O-line in the Rams game was the exception and not the rule.

Wait...let me look at that list again...

Just what I was thinking. Where are the Chiefs on that list? I thought they had the greatest offensive line mankind has ever seen?:wiggle:

[Rock Chalk]

Just what I was thinking. Where are the Chiefs on that list? I thought they had the greatest offensive line mankind has ever seen?:wiggle:

Further proof that sacks is more of a result of the mobility of a QB rather than the effectiveness of the offensive line.

Everyone and their mother knows KC had a superb offensive line.

That is not tos ay that the Offensive line does not have some share of the credit/blame for sacks, but the quarterbacks mobility is the more important factor.

[Atlas]

Did you know that the Broncos offensive line boasts the third fewest sacks in the NFL since 2003? Here is how the top 5 teams break out in sacks allowed in that time:


1. Indianapolis - 60 sacks allowed
2. Green Bay - 65 sacks allowed
3. Denver - 67 sacks allowed (and then a substantial jump)
4. San Diego - 82 sacks allowed
5. New England - 90 sacks allowed

That means nothing afterall you know that Nalen is old and Foster and Carlsile Suck!!!

[BroncoInferno]

Further proof that sacks is more of a result of the mobility of a QB rather than the effectiveness of the offensive line.

Everyone and their mother knows KC had a superb offensive line.

That is not tos ay that the Offensive line does not have some share of the credit/blame for sacks, but the quarterbacks mobility is the more important factor.

Well, a QB with a quick release helps, too. Marino always had low sack numbers even when his OL was only so-so, and he sure as hell wasn't mobile. But he'd get the ball out of his hand in a hurry. Similar thing with Manning. His OL is pretty good, but he helps them by getting rid of the ball quickly.

[Requiem]

That means nothing afterall you know that Nalen is old and Foster and Carlsile Suck!!!


STFU DONT YOU EVER INSULT FOSTER. FK KYLA COLE. :( *cries*

[Willynowei]

Jake doesn't take enough sacks. Thats always been a problem of his. Our O-line is good, but how much do we pass? They aren't that great in pass protection and these numbers lie.

1.) We run.
2.) We have a mobile quarterback
3.) Our mobile quarterback would rather throw the ball up for grabs than take a sack.

= skewed numbers. But Denvers zone blocking O-line does well against blitzes, usually....

[GreatBronco16]

Further proof that sacks is more of a result of the mobility of a QB rather than the effectiveness of the offensive line.




Then why isn't Atlanta on that top 5 list? They have a pretty damn good Oline and the best mobile QB in the game. What about Philly? McNabb is pretty damn mobile too.


So that is further proof that sacks is more of a result of the how well the Oline can contain their blocks, how quickly the WRs can get open, how quickly the QB can make his reads, how fast the QB can release the ball, AND how much mobility the QB has to elude would be tackles from behind the LOS.

[Rascal]

Then why isn't Atlanta on that top 5 list? They have a pretty damn good Oline and the best mobile QB in the game. What about Philly? McNabb is pretty damn mobile too.


So that is further proof that sacks is more of a result of the how well the Oline can contain their blocks, how quickly the WRs can get open, how quickly the QB can make his reads, how fast the QB can release the ball, AND how much mobility the QB has to elude would be tackles from behind the LOS.


They have a good one now, several years ago it was awful.

Although they have still given up 11 sacks this year.

So it isn't the mobility of the QB, and it isn't the line (since Atlanta has a good line as does KC in previous years), so what's left?

Maybe pocket awareness and system?

Can't be the system because Griese was in the same system (and Carr is as well and continues to be sacked at an incredible rate). That leaves pocket awareness. But I thought Jake had horrible pocket awareness according to some?

[Rascal]

Jake doesn't take enough sacks. Thats always been a problem of his. Our O-line is good, but how much do we pass? They aren't that great in pass protection and these numbers lie.

1.) We run.
2.) We have a mobile quarterback
3.) Our mobile quarterback would rather throw the ball up for grabs than take a sack.

= skewed numbers. But Denvers zone blocking O-line does well against blitzes, usually....

I disagree with that. Jake throws a lot of balls away.

Favre is the one who would rather throw it up then take a sack.

[GreatBronco16]

They have a good one now, several years ago it was awful.

Although they have still given up 11 sacks this year.

So it isn't the mobility of the QB, and it isn't the line (since Atlanta has a good line as does KC in previous years), so what's left?

Maybe pocket awareness and system?

Can't be the system because Griese was in the same system (and Carr is as well and continues to be sacked at an incredible rate). That leaves pocket awareness. But I thought Jake had horrible pocket awareness according to some?


See the rest of my post. I pointed out everything that I could think of. Not to mention how good the run game is and if you're playing from behind most of the time which Denver is not.

Too many factors into getting sacked and not getting sacked. So nobody can say that the mobility is the biggest factor.

[Rock Chalk]

Then why isn't Atlanta on that top 5 list? They have a pretty damn good Oline and the best mobile QB in the game. What about Philly? McNabb is pretty damn mobile too.


So that is further proof that sacks is more of a result of the how well the Oline can contain their blocks, how quickly the WRs can get open, how quickly the QB can make his reads, how fast the QB can release the ball, AND how much mobility the QB has to elude would be tackles from behind the LOS.

I didnt say that the o-line wasnt at least partially responsible you non-reading son of a bitch. I said that the mobility of the QB is the largest contributing factor.

There are other factors, just like you mention. The ability to get open for WRs, the release of the ball for the QB and the defensive pressure caused by blitzing which the offensive line is less likely to account for but rather RBs and FBs.

Grading offensive lines by sack numbers is moronic at best and irresponsible use of statistics at worst.

[GonzoLays]

Only a clown would credit our horrendous pass blocking offensive line for allowing the third least amount of sacks since 2003. The top three teams on that list run a version of the west coast offense which built upon the theory of quick, short routes which limits the amount of sacks a QB can potentially take due to the nature of the three step, quick drop. If our QB were to take consistent deep drops, we would lead the league in sacks allowed.

In Indy's case, Payton Manning has been able to take deep drops which in turn has led to a boat load of big plays because his offensive line can actually pass block. Pittsburgh showed last year showed if you pressure Manning, you can limit his effectiveness. Other than New England and Pittsburgh, no team has even come close to pressuring Manning. Thank his offensive line for that.

Only a gullible smuck would credit our offensive line for protecting the QB for 2.3 seconds

[Kaylore]

Did you know that the Broncos offensive line boasts the third fewest sacks in the NFL since 2003? Here is how the top 5 teams break out in sacks allowed in that time:


1. Indianapolis - 60 sacks allowed
2. Green Bay - 65 sacks allowed
3. Denver - 67 sacks allowed (and then a substantial jump)
4. San Diego - 82 sacks allowed
5. New England - 90 sacks allowed
Look again at these teams again and consider the QB's.
1. Manning
2. Favre
3. Plummer
4. Brees
5. Brady

You could argue two of those are scrambling QB's. It is pocket presence more than scrambling ability, the ability to make quick reads and get rid of the ball, and as someone already pointed out, throwing the ball away (or up for grabs) rather than taking a sack.

[Taco John]

Only a clown would credit our horrendous pass blocking offensive line for allowing the third least amount of sacks since 2003. The top three teams on that list run a version of the west coast offense which built upon the theory of quick, short routes which limits the amount of sacks a QB can potentially take due to the nature of the three step, quick drop. If our QB were to take consistent deep drops, we would lead the league in sacks allowed.

In Indy's case, Payton Manning has been able to take deep drops which in turn has led to a boat load of big plays because his offensive line can actually pass block. Pittsburgh showed last year showed if you pressure Manning, you can limit his effectiveness. Other than New England and Pittsburgh, no team has even come close to pressuring Manning. Thank his offensive line for that.

Only a gullible smuck would credit our offensive line for protecting the QB for 2.3 seconds



You don't even believe the things that you say, so why should anyone bother to respond to you?

[Requiem]

Ban the guy!

[Killericon]

Jake's escapability has nothing to do with it, of course.

[OrangeShadow]

talking mobile QBs peyton can actually scramble a bit, he just doesnt have to a whole lot but in the game against the giants he did quite a bit

[labronx]

What about David Carr?

isn't he mobile?

[loborugger]

Carr is mobile. However his O Line puts up about as much fight as the French Army. Remember the ESPN commercial a few years ago regarding the draft. They showed an edited clip of Carr in the shotgun where they edited out all the O Line, and they voice said, "what does your team need?"

That and the dude holds the ball too long.

[elsid13]

I said it before: Plummer makes the line better and the line make Plummer better. It the complete system and not just one part that is the reason for the low sack numbers. Shanahan, the assistant coaches and the front office have darn good job of finding players that work together to form a very good offense team

[Lidderer]

This is ridiculous without mention of Plummer, who shockingly joined this team at the same time!

So with kannel in 4 games(2003) we gave up 9 sacks, and with plummer in the other 12 we gave up 14. So 2.25 per game down to 1.16. Small example, and yet. Average it out across the season and we would jump from 10th(26 sacks allowed) to 2nd(18 sacks) WITH plummer; drop from 10th to 16th(36 sacks allowed) with kanell.

Small sample, yes, but probably indicative of something that other similar situations/numbers would reveal as well. I'll try and think of qb shifts in the recent past(2003-2006) that might reveal other numbers that would help.

[GreatBronco16]

I didnt say that the o-line wasnt at least partially responsible you non-reading son of a b****. I said that the mobility of the QB is the largest contributing factor.

There are other factors, just like you mention. The ability to get open for WRs, the release of the ball for the QB and the defensive pressure caused by blitzing which the offensive line is less likely to account for but rather RBs and FBs.



Listen twinkledick. All I did was shoot down your opinion that mobility is the largest contributing factor for getting or not getting sacked.

Grading offensive lines by sack numbers is moronic at best and irresponsible use of statistics at worst.

Then it's a good thing that I'm not grading offensive lines by sack numbers bob.

[BroncoInferno]

This is ridiculous without mention of Plummer, who shockingly joined this team at the same time!

So with kannel in 4 games(2003) we gave up 9 sacks, and with plummer in the other 12 we gave up 14. So 2.25 per game down to 1.16. Small example, and yet. Average it out across the season and we would jump from 10th(26 sacks allowed) to 2nd(18 sacks) WITH plummer; drop from 10th to 16th(36 sacks allowed) with kanell.

Small sample, yes, but probably indicative of something that other similar situations/numbers would reveal as well. I'll try and think of qb shifts in the recent past(2003-2006) that might reveal other numbers that would help.

Good find, Lidderer. I think it's clear that Plummer's ability to evade the rush helps the line.

[Mile High Shack]

our line has gotten better since 2002, BUT Plummer also can escape the rush a "hair" ;) better than Grieseball.

But like it has been mentioned, if we have to go straight back and pass w/o any threat of the run, our oline (especially on the right side) folds like a cheap tent.

[fontaine]

our line has gotten better since 2002, BUT Plummer also can escape the rush a "hair" ;) better than Grieseball.



Bingo! Here's the right answer.

Plummer's mobility helps, but the key factor in ANY OLs success is continuity and consistency. When Griese was here we were switching OL in and out.

However, we've pretty much had the same OL with Plummer for the past two years and it's the continuity that has made the OL better.

And just to give you fair warning, the next person that disses our OL in pass protection will have ME to contend with.

In our last game, our OL went up against one of the BEST front fours in the league in a close game and even though Plummer was hit one or two times, for the most part he had enough time in the pocket to drop back 27 times (no rollouts) and find Walker for intermediate passes and go through his reads!

So the next person that has a problem with our OL in pass protection can go ahead and STFU.