PDA

View Full Version : McDaniels to scrap the fabled Broncos O line zone blocking scheme?


baja
03-04-2009, 05:00 PM
We thought he would come in and fix the defense and leave the offense alone.

We were wrong, he has proceeded to do a major overhaul so will he change the blocking scheme too. I think it is obvious that he will. He has a plan and it is all his plan.

What do you guys think will McDaniels screw with the o line?

Atlas
03-04-2009, 05:02 PM
Well, Dennison and Turner are still here.

baja
03-04-2009, 05:06 PM
True, but it's obviously going to be his O from NE and my question is does the current O line scheme work with his system?

SonOfLe-loLang
03-04-2009, 05:07 PM
You can run a ZBS from any formation, so i dont see why it would change if he kept turner and dennison

Sodak
03-04-2009, 05:07 PM
If it ain't broken, don't fix it...

I can only hope he doesn't **** up this side of the line. These guys were made for zone blocking.

lex
03-04-2009, 05:08 PM
True, but it's obviously going to be his O from NE and my question is does the current O line scheme work with his system?

I remember reading that he tried to do it at New England with mixed success. It seems like it appeals to him but with his bloodlust, he might get rid of it.

Atlas
03-04-2009, 05:08 PM
True, but it's obviously going to be his O from NE and my question is does the current O line scheme work with his system?

Wow, you know I could really care less. I think I have fallen totally of this bandwagon. I think maybe I'll stay away for awhile, until the draft. Maybe I'll become more enthused.

theAPAOps5
03-04-2009, 05:08 PM
If it ain't broken, don't fix it...

I can only hope he doesn't **** up this side of the line. These guys were made for zone blocking.

Well seeing as how they turned to **** scoring points I hope he does fix it.

Inkana7
03-04-2009, 05:08 PM
True, but it's obviously going to be his O from NE and my question is does the current O line scheme work with his system?

NE runs a zone scheme.

elsid13
03-04-2009, 05:11 PM
People need to understand what he is installing his passing game. NE used the ZBS, that why they drafted Maloney out of MINN

Sodak
03-04-2009, 05:12 PM
Well seeing as how they turned to **** scoring points I hope he does fix it.

You're not talking about the running game are you?

Rohirrim
03-04-2009, 05:13 PM
We thought he would come in and fix the defense and leave the offense alone.

We were wrong, he has proceeded to do a major overhaul so will he change the blocking scheme too. I think it is obvious that he will. He has a plan and it is all his plan.

What do you guys think will McDaniels screw with the o line?

Check your tequila. It's gone bad. ;D

theAPAOps5
03-04-2009, 05:13 PM
You're not talking about the running game are you?

I'm talking about the offense as a whole. That great offense that was number 2 in yards but in the area that mattered they were average.

Taco John
03-04-2009, 05:18 PM
I'm talking about the offense as a whole. That great offense that was number 2 in yards but in the area that mattered they were average.

Give them 8 more turnovers from the defense, do you think they'd have been 16th in scoring?

DB Doom
03-04-2009, 05:19 PM
Wow, you know I could really care less. I think I have fallen totally of this bandwagon. I think maybe I'll stay away for awhile, until the draft. Maybe I'll become more enthused.


i feel the same...and i'm an outsider.
i only post in the off season anyway....
a new problem seems to rise up every other day though..
Positive Energy Activates Constant Elevation.

baja
03-04-2009, 05:20 PM
Check your tequila. It's gone bad. ;D

Damn, I thought the extra worms were just a slip up at the bottling plant...

Sodak
03-04-2009, 05:22 PM
I'm talking about the offense as a whole. That great offense that was number 2 in yards but in the area that mattered they were average.

Right, because the running game sucked. The running game sucked because we didn't have any backs. Seriously, Selvin Young is a backup on most teams. The only back who proved worthwhile was Hillis. Without a goal-line running game, the defenses keyed on the pass.

Is my analysis too simplistic?

bronco militia
03-04-2009, 05:22 PM
most teams run some form of a zone blocking scheme

theAPAOps5
03-04-2009, 05:22 PM
Give them 8 more turnovers from the defense, do you think they'd have been 16th in scoring?

Well seeing as how Shanny wasn't going to fire Slowik that wasn't going to happen.

theAPAOps5
03-04-2009, 05:24 PM
Right, because the running game sucked. The running game sucked because we didn't have any backs. Seriously, Selvin Young is a backup on most teams. The only back who proved worthwhile was Hillis. Without a goal-line running game, the defenses keyed on the pass.

Is my analysis too simplistic?

Oh I'm sorry is my criticism hurting your wittle feelings?

UberBroncoMan
03-04-2009, 05:26 PM
It would be completely moronic to abandon our running scheme... while I think McTard is a jerk and stupid with player management etc... he knows his X's and O's, so I'll give it that he isn't dumb enough to change what's worked for so long.

theAPAOps5
03-04-2009, 05:28 PM
Actually the lines strength last year was pass blocking and sometimes struggled with the zone block on running plays. I am not saying they should abandon it. My point is both sides of the ball can be improved. But I also acknowledge the Defense needs the most work which is why I almost guarantee that the draft is 95% Defense.

Sodak
03-04-2009, 05:30 PM
Oh I'm sorry is my criticism hurting your wittle feelings?

Feelings? Feelings are for cattle and love play.

I thought we were talking football.

Taco John
03-04-2009, 05:30 PM
Well seeing as how Shanny wasn't going to fire Slowik that wasn't going to happen.

Perhaps.

I'm more inclined to believe that the problem with Slowik had more to do with the lack of pressure given what he said in August of last year about knowing that they didn't have the guys to run his scheme, but doing what they could to make it work.

Whether it be Slowick or Nolan, we've got the same problem on defense right now as far as the ability to generate pressure is concerned. I think we've made some good signings this season so far. I'm not excited about the 3-4, but willing to see how it pans out given that it's easier to find consistent linebackers than it is to find consistend Dlinemen.

I'm not against any of the signings we've made. I just don't see what all the fawning is about given that they're exactly the same kind of signings that we've always made.

theAPAOps5
03-04-2009, 05:31 PM
Feelings? Feelings are for cattle and love play.

I thought we were talking football.

:rofl: Nice

More and more teams are going to the zone block so I don't imagine they will abandon it. Especially with Dennison staying on.

theAPAOps5
03-04-2009, 05:33 PM
Perhaps.

I'm more inclined to believe that the problem with Slowik had more to do with the lack of pressure given what he said in August of last year about knowing that they didn't have the guys to run his scheme, but doing what they could to make it work.

Whether it be Slowick or Nolan, we've got the same problem on defense right now as far as the ability to generate pressure is concerned. I think we've made some good signings this season so far. I'm not excited about the 3-4, but willing to see how it pans out given that it's easier to find consistent linebackers than it is to find consistend Dlinemen.

I'm not against any of the signings we've made. I just don't see what all the fawning is about given that they're exactly the same kind of signings that we've always made.

Well I think McD and Nolan know that the perennial contenders drafted and developed DL. We all know that bringing in scraps through FA wasn't the answer. So I fully expect them to address that in the draft. They kept Peterson and Thomas who played so obviously they like them or can use them for now. So maybe with a new DL coach and a solid draft we get that rush.

Br0nc0Buster
03-04-2009, 05:37 PM
?
How do we know this?
the Pats ran zone blocking I think

OBF1
03-04-2009, 05:38 PM
Are you assuming he is going to change it, or have you read it and have a link to provide?

Eldorado
03-04-2009, 05:38 PM
We thought he would come in and fix the defense and leave the offense alone.

We were wrong, he has proceeded to do a major overhaul so will he change the blocking scheme too. I think it is obvious that he will. He has a plan and it is all his plan.

What do you guys think will McDaniels screw with the o line?

[puke]thisthread[/endpuke]

baja
03-04-2009, 05:52 PM
Are you assuming he is going to change it, or have you read it and have a link to provide?

I thought the ? would be a dead give away, guess not.

Rohirrim
03-04-2009, 05:54 PM
I think the fact that Dennison and Turner were kept on makes the question moot.

Dedhed
03-04-2009, 06:02 PM
Give them 8 more turnovers from the defense, do you think they'd have been 16th in scoring?

That's a cop-out answer. They had the #2 offense with that defense, and that means they had enough opportunities to be #2 in scoring as well.

There's no denying the fact that they struggled to get the ball in the end zone.

baja
03-04-2009, 06:04 PM
I think the fact that Dennison and Turner were kept on makes the question moot.

At one point the Goodmans were promised their jobs were secure.

Seems to me McDaniels has picked right where Shanahan left off in getting what Bowlen to do exactly what he wants

Los Broncos
03-04-2009, 06:05 PM
Well seeing as how they turned to **** scoring points I hope he does fix it.

Nice avatar but he has female hands Hilarious!

BroncoInferno
03-04-2009, 07:28 PM
Give them 8 more turnovers from the defense, do you think they'd have been 16th in scoring?

Or perhaps if they turned the ball over eight fewer times themselves? They were the eighth worse in the league in that department. This myth that the offense didn't have serious problems of its own to work out is just that...a myth.

chaz
03-04-2009, 08:16 PM
Or perhaps if they turned the ball over eight fewer times themselves? They were the eighth worse in the league in that department.

ding ding ding

HAT
03-04-2009, 08:42 PM
Or perhaps if they turned the ball over eight fewer times themselves? They were the eighth worse in the league in that department. This myth that the offense didn't have serious problems of its own to work out is just that...a myth.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/3OALtxAlt2o&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/3OALtxAlt2o&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

ayjackson
03-04-2009, 08:50 PM
I had read in 2007 that NE taught their lineman both methods and used ZBS generally when Maroney was in the game, but not for Morris. They chose the system to fit the style of the back in the game...and the featured back depended on the defence they were up against.

It gives more options to success in the running game if you can tailor your attack to the weakness of the opponent's defence.