PDA

View Full Version : Let's be real about the Broncos O


NFLBRONCO
03-27-2009, 02:42 PM
I have read alot of posts on this subject from various threads. I think both sides make solid points.

The simple fact is like it our not we have alot of work to do on this team.

Let's talk O we were #2 in O that sounds good on paper but, were the results good on a steady basis? NO as the season progressed we degressed on O.

Red Zone issues:

Was it a lack of imagination or talent for our woes?

I say both areas need improvement or upgrades

Did we look like a #2 in the league O against playoff teams or when we needed a win to get into playoffs NO. Blaming D is a no brainer because its awful and no doubt needs tons of help but, to say O doesn't need plenty of work is silly too. Why I say plenty of work is Brandon S. has only a yr or two left. BM always screws up off the field is he going to be long term option here not sure unless he straightens up.



RB- I think a healthy group in 09 we could be ok short term if he keeps Hillis like he should.

WR- I like our group but, I still think we need another playmaker or two added to mix. IE Santana Moss Percy Harvin type guy that can make big plays from anywhere. Esp with McD style of O I can't believe a WR isn't on their radar in the draft and earlier then fans expect. BM is always on verge of being suspended every year unless he grows up the'll be gone.

TE: I think we are solid here and hope McD keeps Scheffler around.

OL- I think this group is solid I'm not sure how much changing McD will do in 09 we'll see.


I would not rule out O player in top 3 picks.

Chris
03-27-2009, 02:56 PM
I have a feeling unless we find a steal in the draft we're going to see how our current batch of receivers does this year.

That said, I've never seen a Mcdaniels draft. Should be interesting.

Tombstone RJ
03-27-2009, 03:01 PM
I have read alot of posts on this subject from various threads. I think both sides make solid points.

The simple fact is like it our not we have alot of work to do on this team.

Let's talk O we were #2 in O that sounds good on paper but, were the results good on a steady basis? NO as the season progressed we degressed on O.

Red Zone issues:

Was it a lack of imagination or talent for our woes?

I say both areas need improvement or upgrades



RB- I think a healthy group in 09 we could be ok short term. A RB should considered soon unless he keeps Hillis like he should.

WR- I like our group but, I still think we need another playmaker or two added to mix. IE Santana Moss Percy Harvin type guy that can make big plays from anywhere. Esp with McD style of O I can't believe a WR isn't on their radar in the draft and earlier then fans expect. BM is always on verge of being suspended every year unless he grows up the'll be gone.

TE: I think we are solid here and hope McD keeps Scheffler around.

OL- I think this group is solid I'm not sure how much changing McD will do in 09 we'll see.


So while I agree D should be a high priority in the draft and needs alot of help. I would not rule out O player in top 3 picks.

I think if Cutler comes back and the light bulb goes off in his head as to how this new offense works, then the "O" woes will be taken care of. I still think the Broncos need to draft a RB but I also think that Hillis can be a threat out of the backfield as well. Bringing in Buckhalter and Arrington does not make too much sense to me, other than McD wants a vet RB and Arrington is a special teams guy.

I'd love for the Broncos to get a Percy Harvin type of guy but I just don't see that happening with the defense needing so many pieces. I think the WR position is not a position of need right now, regardless of the BMarsh issues.

As for TE, it's not a priority in this spread offense. They'll either keep Scheff or trade him. Why send him packing if they need to get another TE to replace him?

Really, this draft should concentrate on defense and special teams. I'm also for drafting a mid to late round offensive line guy for depth. If Cutler does not come back then drafting a QB is a real possibility too.

TDmvp
03-27-2009, 03:40 PM
I hope he drafts better than he does EVERYTHING else he has does since I heard his name for the first time ...


Cause if he drafts like he lies , tries to cover up a lie , acts during interviews , dresses , combs his hair , and speaks in public we are hosed...

houghtam
03-27-2009, 04:33 PM
I hope he drafts better than he does EVERYTHING else he has does since I heard his name for the first time ...


Cause if he drafts like he lies , tries to cover up a lie , acts during interviews , dresses , combs his hair , and speaks in public we are hosed...

Hmm...can't say Cutler dresses, interviews, combs his hair, and speaks in public any better than McDaniels. And depending on whom you believe, not sure about the lying, either.

That said, I'm wondering if our failure to produce points is/was system-based. Forgive my old person's memory, but wasn't the red zone scoring a big issue when Plummer was the QB, as well? I seem to remember screaming about Shanahan and Kubiak through my television much more than Plummer during those days...change the quarterback, keep the system, same result last year. I think Shanahan just wasn't as imaginative in the red zone as he used to be. Either that, or Plummer and Cutler were BOTH bad QBs...something I doubt.

BroncoInferno
03-27-2009, 04:39 PM
I agree that WR is something to keep an eye on in the draft. Remember, McDaniels tried to bring David Anderson into the mix even after signing Gaffney, and he hasn't brought anyone else in to fill whatever role it was he envisioned for Anderson. I wouldn't think 1st round, but round 2 or 3 would not surprise me.

Dedhed
03-27-2009, 04:42 PM
I was shocked when McDaniels said the Broncos were 24th in the league in scoring after week 3.

With all the defensive additions through FA, I don't think we'll ignore the offense in the draft at all.

Los Broncos
03-27-2009, 04:44 PM
If we fix the red zome problems we'll be ok.

SportinOne
03-27-2009, 05:15 PM
the original post is kind of funny in that he says, "to say O doesn't need plenty of work is silly too."

Then he lists the positions and gives a brief description of the status of that postion which, all things considered, would indicated that we:

A. Should upgrade running back sooner than later.
B. Keep an eye on Brandon Marshall, otherwise we are solid there.
C. Are solid everywhere else.

That doesn't sound like "plenty of work" to me, although i see the point. I don't think it's that we have such a GREAT offense as much as our defense is just THAT horrible.

Lack of running game, the fact that we have a light o-line, and some bad decisions were what killed us in the red zone and, consequently, our points per game stat. Hopefully we have fixed 2 of those 3 problems now.

If McDaniels sees a wideout that he just CAN'T pass up, well, so be it. Marshall just might be on his way out and who knows how long Stokely has left.

By the way, time out for Brandon Stokely appreciation. One of Shanahan's best decisions.

http://media.scout.com/Media/Image/48/480016.jpg

Okay, back to business.

While I would argue that we already have a Santana Moss type guy in Eddie Royal, we may want to grab a solid #2 type guy. I just really hope we don't have to do it day one. We just have way too many defensive issues. But for picks 4-7, if a project-type WR is available, and by that I mean a guy who has the talent to be a 1st or 2nd rounder but isn't polished, then I say we draft him.

SportinOne
03-27-2009, 05:20 PM
Hmm...can't say Cutler dresses, interviews, combs his hair, and speaks in public any better than McDaniels. And depending on whom you believe, not sure about the lying, either.

I'll give you all of them except for speaking in public. Jay at least doesn't come off as a blood-sucking weasel. I support McD, i'm just saying, if he were the coach of the Chiefs I would turn off the TV every time i saw his face. His mannerisms just, well, let's just say he has that politician aura.

Doggcow
03-27-2009, 05:24 PM
Our offense will be better until like week 7 when we're out of Runningbacks, so lets just build through the D.

TDmvp
03-27-2009, 07:29 PM
Hmm...can't say Cutler dresses, interviews, combs his hair, and speaks in public any better than McDaniels. And depending on whom you believe, not sure about the lying, either.



lol
touche'

frerottenextelway
03-27-2009, 08:09 PM
In short, we were 32nd in starting field position and 9th in the league for points per drive average. So, all and all, we were about the 5th best offense in the league given the conditions (give or take a couple spots).

Room for improvement? Absolutely. Of course, the average starter's age was something like 25, so we should improve with age.

The Defense on the otherhand, was the 31st best defense (The 0-16 lions being worse).

Given that, it just seems bizarre that so much attention goes to the offense.

spdirty
03-27-2009, 08:34 PM
So long as everyone stays healthy, and Hillis is our starter, and the offense stays intact, I dont see where the offense needs any work other than maybe depth and scheme. And if the kicker is part of the offense, well that might need an upgrade if the f'in guy can't figure out how to kick a cold ball.


Good defense and special teams, which will also give the offense its share of layup opportunities, is what this team needs. Too bad the coach doesnt see it that way.

Atlas
03-27-2009, 08:39 PM
Shanny's offesnse was in the top 5 in the NFL in yardage and middle of the road in scoring. They were average in scoring because it was a very young offense and red-zone scoring is one of the last things a dominate offense learns. If Shanny would have stayed this year Denver would have been a dominate offense.

Also going through 7 RBs doesn't help your red-zone scoring either.

Either way if Shanny was still in Denver we would be talking about how Denver is going to overtake S.D. Now we'll be lucky to stay ahead of the Raiders.
This season has 6-10 written all over it.

Inkana7
03-27-2009, 09:18 PM
Shanny wanted to keep Slowik. All the "What If?" scenarios get destroyed by that fact.

watermock
03-27-2009, 09:29 PM
Bowlen didn't have to ask Shanny if he could fire Slowick.

fdf
03-27-2009, 09:31 PM
Either way if Shanny was still in Denver we would be talking about how Denver is going to overtake S.D. Now we'll be lucky to stay ahead of the Raiders. This season has 6-10 written all over it.

Perhaps. But I thought the ongoing deterioration of the defense and what I believe was Shanahan's inability to see the D had to be blown up and restarted was just more of the same mediocrity we have become accustomed to for the past several years.

I expect next season to be difficult. New offensive system. New blocking system for the O Line. Brandon Marshall's troubles and probable suspension. Jay Cutler learning how to work in a system that requires more self-discipline from the QB. It isn't going to be an instant transition.

For the D. Well, it couldn't be worse than last year. And we have clearly upgraded the talent at safety and LB to adequate. But moving Dumervil to LB is going to be a big transition for him. Thomas is going to have to learn to play 3-4 DE. And Williams, B. Bailey, and the chillun at LB are going to have to learn new positions.

So I suspect there are going to be some growing pains on D also. Hopefully, they will be growing pains while going in the right direction. That would be a refreshing change.

Denver was stuck as perennial 7-9 to 9-7 team under the previous management. I hope the new one can unstick it.

Atlas
03-27-2009, 09:38 PM
Perhaps. But I thought the ongoing deterioration of the defense and what I believe was Shanahan's inability to see the D had to be blown up and restarted was just more of the same mediocrity we have become accustomed to for the past several years.

I expect next season to be difficult. New offensive system. New blocking system for the O Line. Brandon Marshall's troubles and probable suspension. Jay Cutler learning how to work in a system that requires more self-discipline from the QB. It isn't going to be an instant transition.

For the D. Well, it couldn't be worse than last year. And we have clearly upgraded the talent at safety and LB to adequate. But moving Dumervil to LB is going to be a big transition for him. Thomas is going to have to learn to play 3-4 DE. And Williams, B. Bailey, and the chillun at LB are going to have to learn new positions.

So I suspect there are going to be some growing pains on D also. Hopefully, they will be growing pains while going in the right direction. That would be a refreshing change.

Denver was stuck as perennial 7-9 to 9-7 team under the previous management. I hope the new one can unstick it.

Shanny spent all hgis draft picks rebuilding the offense surrounding Cutler with talent. I think he deserved one more year so this year he could work on the defense.

Denver was a perenial 7-9-to 9-7 team WHILE THEY REBUILDED. How many teams can say that? Fact is in 2005 they were in the AFC Championship game. We'll see how you guys feel after a 4-12 to 6-10 season and dead last in the AFC West.

Archer81
03-27-2009, 09:40 PM
I really doubt 7 RB's go back on IR this season. That will help alot of it.


:Broncos:

ZONA
03-27-2009, 09:55 PM
If we're keeping it real, let's keep it very real.

Don't expect an offensive juggernaut next season. I think we have alot of talent there but with a new system and a very difficult schedule, I'd be more then pleased with an offense that ranked something like 6th or 7th.

Keeping it real.........our offense was great at moving the ball but just above average at scoring. I think a healthy Hillis playing all 16 games that would have went up quite a bit. But one of the biggest problems I remember is the inconsistent drives resulting in 3 and outs. I recall many times having quite a few of those back to back and that's not good.

TheChamp24
03-27-2009, 11:39 PM
I have read alot of posts on this subject from various threads. I think both sides make solid points.

The simple fact is like it our not we have alot of work to do on this team.

Let's talk O we were #2 in O that sounds good on paper but, were the results good on a steady basis? NO as the season progressed we degressed on O.

Red Zone issues:

Was it a lack of imagination or talent for our woes?

I say both areas need improvement or upgrades

Did we look like a #2 in the league O against playoff teams or when we needed a win to get into playoffs NO. Blaming D is a no brainer because its awful and no doubt needs tons of help but, to say O doesn't need plenty of work is silly too. Why I say plenty of work is Brandon S. has only a yr or two left. BM always screws up off the field is he going to be long term option here not sure unless he straightens up.



RB- I think a healthy group in 09 we could be ok short term if he keeps Hillis like he should.

WR- I like our group but, I still think we need another playmaker or two added to mix. IE Santana Moss Percy Harvin type guy that can make big plays from anywhere. Esp with McD style of O I can't believe a WR isn't on their radar in the draft and earlier then fans expect. BM is always on verge of being suspended every year unless he grows up the'll be gone.

TE: I think we are solid here and hope McD keeps Scheffler around.

OL- I think this group is solid I'm not sure how much changing McD will do in 09 we'll see.


I would not rule out O player in top 3 picks.

RB - we had so many guys injured that actually were doing okay, we have no idea if this position is solid or not. Fact is, Torain looked decent, Hillis looked decent, Pope looked decent, lol. I don't think we should look at this position come draft day and give these guys a look this year to see if anybody is "for real"

WR - the only thing we need at this point is an okay depth guy. Marshall and Royal are a great combo. I don't know why people are clamoring for a must have "playmaker" here. We have them already. We don't need 3 great WR's.

OL - We may need to address this, I never have been a fan of Hamilton and think he should be replaced. Need maybe another depth guy

Offense isn't a huge need, we just have a lot of young guys. How many guys with under 4 years experience? A lot.

Archer81
03-27-2009, 11:44 PM
I really think a run game that utilizes Hillis, Buckhalter and Torrain would be fairly dynamic. If you have Buck and Hillis in the backfield at the same time, creates matchup issues, because either would be capable of blitz pick up or going out in the flat. I am hoping Josh realizes his offense can have Patriot tendencies but should be thoroughly Bronco. He has unique skills here, he should use them, IMO.

:Broncos:

cutthemdown
03-28-2009, 12:10 AM
Broncos just need to get a little more effective when they get into the red zone.

I think attacking some gaps, then zone blocking, could really keep a defense off balance. If you stay at home, and its not a zone play, then you will get outnumbered at point of attack. I think Broncos have a really athletic oline and will be able to do both zone and some gap pulling.

I also think Broncos will throw to the rbs more effectively. Not just as an outlet but as a way to burn the defense when they commit to stopping the WR set. Broncos threw well to WR and TE, but because of injuries, and sort of just not doing it, Broncos failed to really get rb involved.

cutthemdown
03-28-2009, 12:12 AM
I really think a run game that utilizes Hillis, Buckhalter and Torrain would be fairly dynamic. If you have Buck and Hillis in the backfield at the same time, creates matchup issues, because either would be capable of blitz pick up or going out in the flat. I am hoping Josh realizes his offense can have Patriot tendencies but should be thoroughly Bronco. He has unique skills here, he should use them, IMO.

:Broncos:

Well pats almost never went 2 backs. I'm not saying you won't see it, but I'm guessing you won't.

We will be 3 WR more then anything IMO. Graham is going to play a lot as the single TE, with one RB in at a time.

fdf
03-28-2009, 12:36 AM
Denver was a perenial 7-9-to 9-7 team WHILE THEY REBUILDED. How many teams can say that?

Well, I disagree with you that we were in any sense, "rebuilding" under Shanahan. I think he genuinely believed we were only a player or two away from being a superbowl contender. Evidence, the Moss/Crowder draft when they traded away all sorts of picks to move up just a little. The rationale was that we were so stocked with talent that new guys wouldn't make the team. More evidence: Shanahan was going to keep Slowick.

That is not a management team working on rebuilding. It is a management team completely disconnected from the reality that much of their team and the defensive staff sucked. We were nowhere close to being a SB contender. And we were never going to get there until management realized that.

That was, I think, the reason Shanahan was fired. I think he was sincere, but profoundly wrong, when he denied the team needed rebuilding. He couldn't see things had to be blown up and rebuilt on Defense.

BroncoMan4ever
03-28-2009, 12:47 AM
on the talk about our offense being number 2 in yards but 16 in points it comes down to, inside the red zone we had no one who could punch it in from the running game. we had Pittman a couple games and Hillis a couple more, outside of them, nothing. if we have a good running game our PPG will go up.

also it needs to be factored in that our average starting position is like the 17 yard line and we are having to go 80+ yards every drive to get in the end zone. if we can start drives around the 30 then our PPG would go up.

it is a combination of things but for the most part, the main problems were we had no running game and our field position was terrible. plus inside the red zone our play calling got really ****ty. screens that went nowhere, we never used our TE's.

Pick Six
03-28-2009, 12:48 AM
Several dropped balls, bad decisions by Cutler, and no healthy running backs led to a digression of the offense...

BroncoMan4ever
03-28-2009, 12:50 AM
Well, I disagree with you that we were in any sense, "rebuilding" under Shanahan. I think he genuinely believed we were only a player or two away from being a superbowl contender. Evidence, the Moss/Crowder draft when they traded away all sorts of picks to move up just a little. The rationale was that we were so stocked with talent that new guys wouldn't make the team. More evidence: Shanahan was going to keep Slowick.

That is not a management team working on rebuilding. It is a management team completely disconnected from the reality that much of their team and the defensive staff sucked. We were nowhere close to being a SB contender. And we were never going to get there until management realized that.

That was, I think, the reason Shanahan was fired. I think he was sincere, but profoundly wrong, when he denied the team needed rebuilding. He couldn't see things had to be blown up and rebuilt on Defense.

i completely agree. we were a team that needed to be rebuilt, but Mike was looking at us and thinking if i can just find that one guy to put us over the top we will be elite again.

i am not sure if it was just his own ego thinking that or just the fact that he did not want to have to rebuild a team, expecially when he sees an offense that was a good RB away from being really good.

atomicbloke
03-28-2009, 01:15 AM
We had real bad luck with injuries at key skill and trench positions last 2 seasons. Lets hope our fate changes this season.

Atlas
03-28-2009, 07:24 AM
Well, I disagree with you that we were in any sense, "rebuilding" under Shanahan. I think he genuinely believed we were only a player or two away from being a superbowl contender. Evidence, the Moss/Crowder draft when they traded away all sorts of picks to move up just a little. The rationale was that we were so stocked with talent that new guys wouldn't make the team. More evidence: Shanahan was going to keep Slowick.

That is not a management team working on rebuilding. It is a management team completely disconnected from the reality that much of their team and the defensive staff sucked. We were nowhere close to being a SB contender. And we were never going to get there until management realized that.

That was, I think, the reason Shanahan was fired. I think he was sincere, but profoundly wrong, when he denied the team needed rebuilding. He couldn't see things had to be blown up and rebuilt on Defense.


HE re-built the entire offense without rebuilding!!

WolfpackGuy
03-28-2009, 08:15 AM
HE re-built the entire offense without rebuilding!!

Exactly. The Broncos also went from one of the oldest teams in the league to one of the youngest in just over 2 years.

Cito Pelon
03-28-2009, 08:53 AM
I was shocked when McDaniels said the Broncos were 24th in the league in scoring after week 3.

With all the defensive additions through FA, I don't think we'll ignore the offense in the draft at all.

They scored over 20 pts in only 6 of the final 13 games, over 30 only twice, had 7 pts scored once and 10 pts twice, avg'd 18.5 ppg over the final 13 games. 31% of the total pts for the year were scored in the first 3 games,

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/den/2008.htm

So yeah, I guess the O could stand some improvement.

Cito Pelon
03-28-2009, 09:00 AM
the original post is kind of funny in that he says, "to say O doesn't need plenty of work is silly too."

Then he lists the positions and gives a brief description of the status of that postion which, all things considered, would indicated that we:

A. Should upgrade running back sooner than later.
B. Keep an eye on Brandon Marshall, otherwise we are solid there.
C. Are solid everywhere else.

That doesn't sound like "plenty of work" to me, although i see the point. I don't think it's that we have such a GREAT offense as much as our defense is just THAT horrible.

Lack of running game, the fact that we have a light o-line, and some bad decisions were what killed us in the red zone and, consequently, our points per game stat. Hopefully we have fixed 2 of those 3 problems now.

If McDaniels sees a wideout that he just CAN'T pass up, well, so be it. Marshall just might be on his way out and who knows how long Stokely has left.

By the way, time out for Brandon Stokely appreciation. One of Shanahan's best decisions.

http://media.scout.com/Media/Image/48/480016.jpg

Okay, back to business.

While I would argue that we already have a Santana Moss type guy in Eddie Royal, we may want to grab a solid #2 type guy. I just really hope we don't have to do it day one. We just have way too many defensive issues. But for picks 4-7, if a project-type WR is available, and by that I mean a guy who has the talent to be a 1st or 2nd rounder but isn't polished, then I say we draft him.

Jesus. First you say that doesn't sound like plenty of work.

Then you say Lack of running game, the fact that we have a light o-line, and some bad decisions . That sounds like plenty of work.