Traveler
12-06-2006, 09:01 AM
Best beat writer in football...bar none!
http://blogs.rockymountainnews.com/denver/broncos/archives/2006/12/on_the_offensiv.html
On the offensive about the offense
Wednesday, December 6 at 12:01 AM | Trackbacks
Tony Ellsworth in Papillion, Neb., tops off what was another triple-digit flurry of action this week on the Broncos offense . . .
Q: Let's take a quick inventory of the Broncos assets: four talented wide receivers (also good receiving tight ends), a rookie quarterback with mobility and a rocket arm, a running back with exceptional speed. I know this is contrary to a normal conservative gameplan with a rookie quarterback, but what about spreading it out with four wide receivers and running draws and screens to Tatum Bell as a change up? Broncos have to use Brandon Marshall, Javon Walker and Jay Cutler to have a chance. Thoughts?
A: The biggest reason some teams don't open up the formation on offense more these days is protection. Folks have wondered about this before and I've always said what many defensive coordinators have told me over the years, an empty backfield or a formation with four wide receivers in it is often a signal for an automatic blitz.
The thinking is the offense will have five blocking on five or six rushers so a lot of guys calling the defensive signals like those odds. A quarterback gets punished plenty in a spread look and that's why you see a bigger percentage of offenses in the spread in high and college than would consider it in the NFL.
There is just too much speed on the edge, as well as at linebacker and at safety across the board in the NFL to consistently put a quarterback in the spread and expect him to survive too many seasons without a major injury.
Kurt Warner took plenty of punishment in the Rams' high-flying days and it eventually affected his play over the long term. An under-rated aspect of Warren Moon's play in the Oilers' run-and-shoot days was the number of hits he took, yet he still stayed in the lineup.
Implementing pass protections is also usually one of the bigger jumps a coach can make from designing a playbook and college and making one in the NFL.
With the salary cap the quarterback is often both the most valuable player, as well as the one carrying the biggest contract, so to consistently put that player in harm's way is both a financial and personnel risk for a franchise.
A guy with $100 million contract in some cases being served up to blitz after blitz is just not something a team wants to live with.
However, offensive coaches will also tell you now that, with the rules book, and the officials strictly enforcing downfield contact rules, it is worth a long look in some situations to pump up the number of receivers on the field because there are certainly plays to be made.
Inside the 20s, however, it does get tougher for a spread offense to score against a quality defense because there is less room to get all of the receivers passing lanes to work in. It's easier in the short area for the defense to play the angles down there, which is why an offense is looking for a receiver to win 1-on-1 match-ups in those situations.
As far as the Broncos, Marshall certainly showed the dimension he could bring -- with the tackle-breaking touchdown play in the fourth quarter Sunday night -- if he can consistently get himself in the right spots in his routes.
This season the Broncos have run three- and four-wide receiver looks quite a bit. They had 23 four wide-receiver snaps against the Chiefs on Thanksgiving, 25 three wide receiver snaps the week before against the Chargers, 15 three wide receiver snaps against the Raiders the week before that.
This week the Chargers rush the passer well so if the Broncos want to spread it out a little bit, they would likely have to shorten the dropbacks as well -- some three- or five-step things -- because out of the 3-4 San Diego can bring pressure from off angles and they have two finishers in Shawne Merriman and Shaun Phillips on the outside.
Paul Guthner also stayed on the offensive side of the ball . . .
Q: My question is with respect to Rod Smith. Has age finally caught up to him? Is there something about him that isn't being reported? Is the offense so completely centered around Jevon Walker that Smith is just lost in the mix? . . . I find it of some coincidence that the Bronco offense is having its worst year ever under Shanahan is the same year that Rod Smith is having his worst year since he was a rookie.
A: Smith is the second-oldest receiver in the NFL -- behind San Diego's Keenan McCardell -- and he is on pace for his lowest output in both catches and yards receiving since 1996. That was his third year with the team, his second year on the active roster after spending 1994 on the practice squad.
Javon Walker is the first option in the passing game, it's why the Broncos surrendered a second-round pick and already signed him to a long-term deal that kicks in during the offseason should they pick up an option bonus as expected.
Smith does have some aches and pains -- only natural for a player who has played so many games and rarely takes even a practice off -- and some opposing secondary coaches believe he doesn't have the explosion out of his cuts he had earlier in his career, which is where Smith always got his separation despite not having the speed of some other receivers.
Again that's a natural progression. Nobody in the league is as physically gifted in his 10th season as he was in his second, the game is simply too demanding. He's also had a smattering of drops, but he like a lot of Broncos, may be pressing a bit given that a season that began with so many expectations because they made it to the AFC Championship Game last year has been a bit of a struggle.
But Smith is one of the most savvy, technically sound players in the league, he's one of the hardest workers and knows how to use body position as well as work a route to the maximum. His role may no longer be to finish with 1,200 yards receiving, but it still could be bigger if the Broncos were more efficient passing the ball overall.
Smith and Walker are the only two players on the Broncos roster with more than 20 receptions this season, they are the only two wide receivers with more than seven receptions and the season is 12 games old. That means the output is down across the board, now just in Smith's direction.
With everything said Smith is still going to be a 50-catch player at his current pace, there is always a place for that.
Justin Blackburn in Phoenix cast a raised eyebrow at the Broncos quarterback switch . . .
Q: In terms of quarterbacks in Denver, the bar that Cutler has to (meet) should not be Hall of Famer John Elway, but rather the two guys who started in Denver since Elway or the two quarterbacks drafted this year before him. Brian Griese’s second season as a starter, he led the league in passing efficiency with a rating of 102, won 11 games, and led the team to the playoffs. In three seasons in Denver, Jake Plummer has led the team to three playoff appearances and an AFC Championship Game and had seasons of 10-6, 10-6, and 13-3. Griese won a national title and Plummer led Arizona State to within two minutes of a national title. Vince Young and Matt Leinart contended for or won the Heisman, won National Championships, and are both struggling this year. Consider that in four years in College, Cutler never led his team to a single winning season and he played at a very mediocre program where there were no expectations. Vandy does not prepare a quarterback for expectations in the NFL, especially Denver.
What is it that makes Jay Cutler a better quarterback than either the last two in Denver (Griese, Plummer) or the two drafted in front of him this year (Young, Leinart) -- all four of whom have played in Rose Bowls, finished top three in the Heisman voting, and either won or came within a play of winning a national title? Is Cutler’s talent so great that he overcomes the lack of expectations and big game experience in college and out-performs these players that came from winning programs where they stood out?
A: Interesting thought on it all. In terms of Cutler as a prospect, having lived in Nashville for two of his seasons as a Vanderbilt starter and having seen most of his games either in person or on video, there is a school of thought that what he did at Vandy was something that weighed in his favor when compared to the others on the board.
He consistently performed, with few, if any some years, pro prospects around him in the Commodores offense and he did it in what most scouts believe is the elite conference in the nation, especially when you're talking about pass rushers across the board year after year.
One general manager told me before the draft "the question is not how Cutler would do at USC, the question is how Matt Leinart would do at Vandy?'' Cutler was the Southeastern Conference's consensus Offensive Player of the Year at Vanderbilt, it simply is one of the most difficult things anyone has done in college football in recent years.
Leinart was surrounded by NFL draft picks, including another Heisman winner and a second-round pick in the backfield alone. The tight end was a draft pick, several linemen were draft picks over his career.
Scouts weigh all of those things too. Cutler also never missed a game despite the punishment he took throwing the ball. He even ran the option the first two years and in his final two years was blitzed plenty because the Commodores didn't often slow down opposing pass rushers with a consistent running game.
So certainly he got credit for all of that. That said plenty of scouts also questioned the fact he didn't have a winning record, though I don't know how he could have. Elway didn't win as many games at Stanford as other guys won other places, but he's still in the Hall of Fame.
As far as comparing a rookie to a Hall of Famer, I'm certainly not in favor of it.
One of the more fascinating things about the NFL is that folks often think Hall of Fame passers come in bunches and are somehow a given.
They don't and they aren't. In fact the stark reality is a fan may get to see one on his favorite team once every football generation and maybe not even then. People in Detroit, Chicago, New York, Baltimore, Minnesota and on and on have waited for decades to see the next one.
Broncos fans had Elway, that just may be the allotment for some time. People in Dallas want to see someone be the next Roger Staubach, the next Troy Aikman, but that was two Hall of Famers in a short period of time, that's already beating the odds, to ask for a third is probably an unreasonable expectation that will continually lead to frustration with the guy who is playing.
In San Francisco people had the ultimate, they had back-to-back Hall of Famers behind center in Joe Montana and Steve Young in the last 20 years and they still want another. It's not going to happen.
If you needed a Hall of Fame quarterback to win the Super Bowl then there would be years when the trophy wasn't awarded. Quarterbacks should be graded on the here and now, including those just starting out like Cutler.
Did they run their teams efficiently? Was there enough talent around them to win? Did they do their part? Did they do the work to get better? Were they coached well? How did the guy carry himself in both good and bad times?
Those are the benchmarks, not if any of them can go to Canton.
Don Lyon in Cleveland Heights, Ohio, . . .
Q: I haven't seen much written about the fake field goal that resulted in the injury to (Jason) Elam. What happened? Shanahan looked like he was lost on the sidelines. What possible reason could there have been for trying it when, once they were finished fooling around, there would only have been time to kick a field goal anyway -- unless they thought Elam would run for a touchdown. And why risk your kicker when Plummer had the ball in his hands to start the play? Was this just a brain cramp?
A: The short answer is the Broncos believed the way the Seahawks over-loaded the formation and rushed field goals in most cases this season when in a similar spot on the field, that they would score a touchdown on the play.
In hindsight getting Elam hurt -- a strained left hamstring -- and then having to simply kick on the next play after a two-year gain, it looks like a bad decision. After looking at the play Monday the Broncos were of the opinion that two things contributed to the play's failure.
One was an ankle injury to Stephen Alexander put linebacker Patrick Chukwurah in the lineup up front and that Chukwurah, simply wanting to fulfill his blocking assignment, was a little too aggressive blocking down to the inside so the Seahawks saw that as something different -- much like a defensive lineman, who it let go on a screen pass suddenly figures out he was let go for a reason and backtracks.
Also, former Broncos cornerback Kelly Herndon was on the field for Seattle. And Shanahan said Herndon acted, from the start of the play, "like he knew something was up.''
It's the old adage, trick plays are great when they work. When they don't, they're bad.
Simple rule, but most coaches accept it as part of the job.
John Coates wondered . . .
Q: Seems like all everyone wants to talk and/or write about are issues regarding Jay Cutler. His rookie learning curve is going to be there and all reasonable Bronco fans should know that. But what I was hoping for was that the rest of team would step up and finally become the team that most of us thought they would be this year. In doing so, I hoped they would cover his mistakes with their good play … I am now convinced that they just are not that good a team overall. What I saw Sunday night was a running game that was only good for one-half of a game (the wrong half at that); a pass rush that was totally ineffective when it really needed to be most effective (during Seattle's last drive); continued poor special teams play; a defensive coordinator whose play calling against the pass has become predictable by the other teams offensive coordinators; a head coach who is trying to exert too much control over the offense with the most conservative "West Coast" style of play I have ever seen. I see the Broncos' loss being the result of all these deficiencies, not the expected mistakes of a rookie put into a pressure cooker that would have toasted any young quarterback . . . Whatever the causes, the Broncos are not the team we hoped they were at the beginning of the season. The talent seems to be there, which leads me to think there are root problems with the coaching staff . . . So what do you think about this and the possibility we could see some coaching changes for next year?
Joel Stevens also took a swing at the Broncos special teams . . .
A: Shanahan doesn't change assistant coaches all that often for reasons other than a guy getting another job somewhere else. He has only fired an assistant -- secondary coach David Gibbs in 2004 -- during a season once.
But certainly as one who preaches accountability to the players so often, Shanahan always looks at the staff at the end of each season. Special teams play, especially in the return game, has been a trouble spot all year so that will certainly get the review.
Shanahan runs the team's offense, including making many of the play calls on gameday, so any changes on the staff on offense would usually be a result of someone being unable to work in that environment where the head coach has such a big imprint on one side of the ball, especially on gameday.
Defensively, the many of the troubles look to be a by-product of a pass rush that doesn't consistently put heat on opposing passers, especially in terms of somebody beating a double team late in the game to get the sack that ends the drive. The Broncos were aggressive in free agency trying to pursue defensive ends last March, but it was an expensive club and those players (John Abraham and Andre Carter) got offered more elsewhere. I would expect them to be that aggressive again in the upcoming free agency season at that position again.
The Broncos are also often one of the most veteran rosters in the league -- usually one of the higher average age -- and while that usually translates into a team that doesn't make many silly mistakes, isn't penalized much and executes diverse gameplans each week, it also takes only a few injuries to derail their plans.
It's no accident Shanahan's four best seasons were also the four seasons of his tenure when he lost the fewest starters to injury.
And finally Steven Brian was the first of many to again ask about Terrell Davis' Hall of Fame chances so it was a chance to revisit . . .
A: Davis is in his first year of eligibility and made the first cutdown from the original list of 111 players to the 25 semifinalists the Board of Selectors is currently considering. The list of 17 finalists, which includes 15 players that are voted upon as well as two candidates already chosen by the seniors committee earlier in the year, is made -- the 15 by vote -- in December, then usually released by the Hall of Fame in January.
As far as Davis, the fact he made it to the list of 25 semifinalists in his first year of eligibility shows he has some support. But the length of his career will be the chief obstacle for his induction.
Voters want to see prolonged excellence and there has to be some compelling reasons to look away from the longer careers.
That said, having discussed his candidacy with the voters it's clear Davis' postseason performance should carry plenty of weight as well, as will his three-season period when he fueled a two-time Super Bowl champion as well as another 13-3 team in 1996 -- three 1,500-yard seasons, two 1,700 yard seasons and the 2,008-yard season in those three years.
Steven also asked if Davis' three-year run was the best ever. By my records it is with Davis' 5,296 yards rushing over those three years just ahead of Eric Dickerson's 5,147 yards over the first three years of his career.
That three-year total for Davis also happens to be just under 70 percent of his career rushing yardage with the Broncos. Some voters are going to have a problem with that as well.
He had seven postseason 100-yard rushing games and fact the Broncos won all seven of those games are huge plusses. Also he is a rare player to have won the league's MVP and a Super Bowl MVP in his career.
Put that with his historical 2,008-yard season and there is plenty to work with. Still, some voters are going to say he simply didn't play long enough.
And while some have argued Gale Sayers didn't play very long either because -- like Davis -- of injury, Sayers was a transcendent running back in his time as well as also being the dominant kick returner of his era.
As I've said before it may take some time, but my hope is Davis will be a finalist at some point so he gets heavy consideration at the final meeting where the votes are taken. The committee debates the finalists face to face the day before the Super Bowl.
http://blogs.rockymountainnews.com/denver/broncos/archives/2006/12/on_the_offensiv.html
On the offensive about the offense
Wednesday, December 6 at 12:01 AM | Trackbacks
Tony Ellsworth in Papillion, Neb., tops off what was another triple-digit flurry of action this week on the Broncos offense . . .
Q: Let's take a quick inventory of the Broncos assets: four talented wide receivers (also good receiving tight ends), a rookie quarterback with mobility and a rocket arm, a running back with exceptional speed. I know this is contrary to a normal conservative gameplan with a rookie quarterback, but what about spreading it out with four wide receivers and running draws and screens to Tatum Bell as a change up? Broncos have to use Brandon Marshall, Javon Walker and Jay Cutler to have a chance. Thoughts?
A: The biggest reason some teams don't open up the formation on offense more these days is protection. Folks have wondered about this before and I've always said what many defensive coordinators have told me over the years, an empty backfield or a formation with four wide receivers in it is often a signal for an automatic blitz.
The thinking is the offense will have five blocking on five or six rushers so a lot of guys calling the defensive signals like those odds. A quarterback gets punished plenty in a spread look and that's why you see a bigger percentage of offenses in the spread in high and college than would consider it in the NFL.
There is just too much speed on the edge, as well as at linebacker and at safety across the board in the NFL to consistently put a quarterback in the spread and expect him to survive too many seasons without a major injury.
Kurt Warner took plenty of punishment in the Rams' high-flying days and it eventually affected his play over the long term. An under-rated aspect of Warren Moon's play in the Oilers' run-and-shoot days was the number of hits he took, yet he still stayed in the lineup.
Implementing pass protections is also usually one of the bigger jumps a coach can make from designing a playbook and college and making one in the NFL.
With the salary cap the quarterback is often both the most valuable player, as well as the one carrying the biggest contract, so to consistently put that player in harm's way is both a financial and personnel risk for a franchise.
A guy with $100 million contract in some cases being served up to blitz after blitz is just not something a team wants to live with.
However, offensive coaches will also tell you now that, with the rules book, and the officials strictly enforcing downfield contact rules, it is worth a long look in some situations to pump up the number of receivers on the field because there are certainly plays to be made.
Inside the 20s, however, it does get tougher for a spread offense to score against a quality defense because there is less room to get all of the receivers passing lanes to work in. It's easier in the short area for the defense to play the angles down there, which is why an offense is looking for a receiver to win 1-on-1 match-ups in those situations.
As far as the Broncos, Marshall certainly showed the dimension he could bring -- with the tackle-breaking touchdown play in the fourth quarter Sunday night -- if he can consistently get himself in the right spots in his routes.
This season the Broncos have run three- and four-wide receiver looks quite a bit. They had 23 four wide-receiver snaps against the Chiefs on Thanksgiving, 25 three wide receiver snaps the week before against the Chargers, 15 three wide receiver snaps against the Raiders the week before that.
This week the Chargers rush the passer well so if the Broncos want to spread it out a little bit, they would likely have to shorten the dropbacks as well -- some three- or five-step things -- because out of the 3-4 San Diego can bring pressure from off angles and they have two finishers in Shawne Merriman and Shaun Phillips on the outside.
Paul Guthner also stayed on the offensive side of the ball . . .
Q: My question is with respect to Rod Smith. Has age finally caught up to him? Is there something about him that isn't being reported? Is the offense so completely centered around Jevon Walker that Smith is just lost in the mix? . . . I find it of some coincidence that the Bronco offense is having its worst year ever under Shanahan is the same year that Rod Smith is having his worst year since he was a rookie.
A: Smith is the second-oldest receiver in the NFL -- behind San Diego's Keenan McCardell -- and he is on pace for his lowest output in both catches and yards receiving since 1996. That was his third year with the team, his second year on the active roster after spending 1994 on the practice squad.
Javon Walker is the first option in the passing game, it's why the Broncos surrendered a second-round pick and already signed him to a long-term deal that kicks in during the offseason should they pick up an option bonus as expected.
Smith does have some aches and pains -- only natural for a player who has played so many games and rarely takes even a practice off -- and some opposing secondary coaches believe he doesn't have the explosion out of his cuts he had earlier in his career, which is where Smith always got his separation despite not having the speed of some other receivers.
Again that's a natural progression. Nobody in the league is as physically gifted in his 10th season as he was in his second, the game is simply too demanding. He's also had a smattering of drops, but he like a lot of Broncos, may be pressing a bit given that a season that began with so many expectations because they made it to the AFC Championship Game last year has been a bit of a struggle.
But Smith is one of the most savvy, technically sound players in the league, he's one of the hardest workers and knows how to use body position as well as work a route to the maximum. His role may no longer be to finish with 1,200 yards receiving, but it still could be bigger if the Broncos were more efficient passing the ball overall.
Smith and Walker are the only two players on the Broncos roster with more than 20 receptions this season, they are the only two wide receivers with more than seven receptions and the season is 12 games old. That means the output is down across the board, now just in Smith's direction.
With everything said Smith is still going to be a 50-catch player at his current pace, there is always a place for that.
Justin Blackburn in Phoenix cast a raised eyebrow at the Broncos quarterback switch . . .
Q: In terms of quarterbacks in Denver, the bar that Cutler has to (meet) should not be Hall of Famer John Elway, but rather the two guys who started in Denver since Elway or the two quarterbacks drafted this year before him. Brian Griese’s second season as a starter, he led the league in passing efficiency with a rating of 102, won 11 games, and led the team to the playoffs. In three seasons in Denver, Jake Plummer has led the team to three playoff appearances and an AFC Championship Game and had seasons of 10-6, 10-6, and 13-3. Griese won a national title and Plummer led Arizona State to within two minutes of a national title. Vince Young and Matt Leinart contended for or won the Heisman, won National Championships, and are both struggling this year. Consider that in four years in College, Cutler never led his team to a single winning season and he played at a very mediocre program where there were no expectations. Vandy does not prepare a quarterback for expectations in the NFL, especially Denver.
What is it that makes Jay Cutler a better quarterback than either the last two in Denver (Griese, Plummer) or the two drafted in front of him this year (Young, Leinart) -- all four of whom have played in Rose Bowls, finished top three in the Heisman voting, and either won or came within a play of winning a national title? Is Cutler’s talent so great that he overcomes the lack of expectations and big game experience in college and out-performs these players that came from winning programs where they stood out?
A: Interesting thought on it all. In terms of Cutler as a prospect, having lived in Nashville for two of his seasons as a Vanderbilt starter and having seen most of his games either in person or on video, there is a school of thought that what he did at Vandy was something that weighed in his favor when compared to the others on the board.
He consistently performed, with few, if any some years, pro prospects around him in the Commodores offense and he did it in what most scouts believe is the elite conference in the nation, especially when you're talking about pass rushers across the board year after year.
One general manager told me before the draft "the question is not how Cutler would do at USC, the question is how Matt Leinart would do at Vandy?'' Cutler was the Southeastern Conference's consensus Offensive Player of the Year at Vanderbilt, it simply is one of the most difficult things anyone has done in college football in recent years.
Leinart was surrounded by NFL draft picks, including another Heisman winner and a second-round pick in the backfield alone. The tight end was a draft pick, several linemen were draft picks over his career.
Scouts weigh all of those things too. Cutler also never missed a game despite the punishment he took throwing the ball. He even ran the option the first two years and in his final two years was blitzed plenty because the Commodores didn't often slow down opposing pass rushers with a consistent running game.
So certainly he got credit for all of that. That said plenty of scouts also questioned the fact he didn't have a winning record, though I don't know how he could have. Elway didn't win as many games at Stanford as other guys won other places, but he's still in the Hall of Fame.
As far as comparing a rookie to a Hall of Famer, I'm certainly not in favor of it.
One of the more fascinating things about the NFL is that folks often think Hall of Fame passers come in bunches and are somehow a given.
They don't and they aren't. In fact the stark reality is a fan may get to see one on his favorite team once every football generation and maybe not even then. People in Detroit, Chicago, New York, Baltimore, Minnesota and on and on have waited for decades to see the next one.
Broncos fans had Elway, that just may be the allotment for some time. People in Dallas want to see someone be the next Roger Staubach, the next Troy Aikman, but that was two Hall of Famers in a short period of time, that's already beating the odds, to ask for a third is probably an unreasonable expectation that will continually lead to frustration with the guy who is playing.
In San Francisco people had the ultimate, they had back-to-back Hall of Famers behind center in Joe Montana and Steve Young in the last 20 years and they still want another. It's not going to happen.
If you needed a Hall of Fame quarterback to win the Super Bowl then there would be years when the trophy wasn't awarded. Quarterbacks should be graded on the here and now, including those just starting out like Cutler.
Did they run their teams efficiently? Was there enough talent around them to win? Did they do their part? Did they do the work to get better? Were they coached well? How did the guy carry himself in both good and bad times?
Those are the benchmarks, not if any of them can go to Canton.
Don Lyon in Cleveland Heights, Ohio, . . .
Q: I haven't seen much written about the fake field goal that resulted in the injury to (Jason) Elam. What happened? Shanahan looked like he was lost on the sidelines. What possible reason could there have been for trying it when, once they were finished fooling around, there would only have been time to kick a field goal anyway -- unless they thought Elam would run for a touchdown. And why risk your kicker when Plummer had the ball in his hands to start the play? Was this just a brain cramp?
A: The short answer is the Broncos believed the way the Seahawks over-loaded the formation and rushed field goals in most cases this season when in a similar spot on the field, that they would score a touchdown on the play.
In hindsight getting Elam hurt -- a strained left hamstring -- and then having to simply kick on the next play after a two-year gain, it looks like a bad decision. After looking at the play Monday the Broncos were of the opinion that two things contributed to the play's failure.
One was an ankle injury to Stephen Alexander put linebacker Patrick Chukwurah in the lineup up front and that Chukwurah, simply wanting to fulfill his blocking assignment, was a little too aggressive blocking down to the inside so the Seahawks saw that as something different -- much like a defensive lineman, who it let go on a screen pass suddenly figures out he was let go for a reason and backtracks.
Also, former Broncos cornerback Kelly Herndon was on the field for Seattle. And Shanahan said Herndon acted, from the start of the play, "like he knew something was up.''
It's the old adage, trick plays are great when they work. When they don't, they're bad.
Simple rule, but most coaches accept it as part of the job.
John Coates wondered . . .
Q: Seems like all everyone wants to talk and/or write about are issues regarding Jay Cutler. His rookie learning curve is going to be there and all reasonable Bronco fans should know that. But what I was hoping for was that the rest of team would step up and finally become the team that most of us thought they would be this year. In doing so, I hoped they would cover his mistakes with their good play … I am now convinced that they just are not that good a team overall. What I saw Sunday night was a running game that was only good for one-half of a game (the wrong half at that); a pass rush that was totally ineffective when it really needed to be most effective (during Seattle's last drive); continued poor special teams play; a defensive coordinator whose play calling against the pass has become predictable by the other teams offensive coordinators; a head coach who is trying to exert too much control over the offense with the most conservative "West Coast" style of play I have ever seen. I see the Broncos' loss being the result of all these deficiencies, not the expected mistakes of a rookie put into a pressure cooker that would have toasted any young quarterback . . . Whatever the causes, the Broncos are not the team we hoped they were at the beginning of the season. The talent seems to be there, which leads me to think there are root problems with the coaching staff . . . So what do you think about this and the possibility we could see some coaching changes for next year?
Joel Stevens also took a swing at the Broncos special teams . . .
A: Shanahan doesn't change assistant coaches all that often for reasons other than a guy getting another job somewhere else. He has only fired an assistant -- secondary coach David Gibbs in 2004 -- during a season once.
But certainly as one who preaches accountability to the players so often, Shanahan always looks at the staff at the end of each season. Special teams play, especially in the return game, has been a trouble spot all year so that will certainly get the review.
Shanahan runs the team's offense, including making many of the play calls on gameday, so any changes on the staff on offense would usually be a result of someone being unable to work in that environment where the head coach has such a big imprint on one side of the ball, especially on gameday.
Defensively, the many of the troubles look to be a by-product of a pass rush that doesn't consistently put heat on opposing passers, especially in terms of somebody beating a double team late in the game to get the sack that ends the drive. The Broncos were aggressive in free agency trying to pursue defensive ends last March, but it was an expensive club and those players (John Abraham and Andre Carter) got offered more elsewhere. I would expect them to be that aggressive again in the upcoming free agency season at that position again.
The Broncos are also often one of the most veteran rosters in the league -- usually one of the higher average age -- and while that usually translates into a team that doesn't make many silly mistakes, isn't penalized much and executes diverse gameplans each week, it also takes only a few injuries to derail their plans.
It's no accident Shanahan's four best seasons were also the four seasons of his tenure when he lost the fewest starters to injury.
And finally Steven Brian was the first of many to again ask about Terrell Davis' Hall of Fame chances so it was a chance to revisit . . .
A: Davis is in his first year of eligibility and made the first cutdown from the original list of 111 players to the 25 semifinalists the Board of Selectors is currently considering. The list of 17 finalists, which includes 15 players that are voted upon as well as two candidates already chosen by the seniors committee earlier in the year, is made -- the 15 by vote -- in December, then usually released by the Hall of Fame in January.
As far as Davis, the fact he made it to the list of 25 semifinalists in his first year of eligibility shows he has some support. But the length of his career will be the chief obstacle for his induction.
Voters want to see prolonged excellence and there has to be some compelling reasons to look away from the longer careers.
That said, having discussed his candidacy with the voters it's clear Davis' postseason performance should carry plenty of weight as well, as will his three-season period when he fueled a two-time Super Bowl champion as well as another 13-3 team in 1996 -- three 1,500-yard seasons, two 1,700 yard seasons and the 2,008-yard season in those three years.
Steven also asked if Davis' three-year run was the best ever. By my records it is with Davis' 5,296 yards rushing over those three years just ahead of Eric Dickerson's 5,147 yards over the first three years of his career.
That three-year total for Davis also happens to be just under 70 percent of his career rushing yardage with the Broncos. Some voters are going to have a problem with that as well.
He had seven postseason 100-yard rushing games and fact the Broncos won all seven of those games are huge plusses. Also he is a rare player to have won the league's MVP and a Super Bowl MVP in his career.
Put that with his historical 2,008-yard season and there is plenty to work with. Still, some voters are going to say he simply didn't play long enough.
And while some have argued Gale Sayers didn't play very long either because -- like Davis -- of injury, Sayers was a transcendent running back in his time as well as also being the dominant kick returner of his era.
As I've said before it may take some time, but my hope is Davis will be a finalist at some point so he gets heavy consideration at the final meeting where the votes are taken. The committee debates the finalists face to face the day before the Super Bowl.