PDA

View Full Version : Where'd the Wild Horses go?


Irish Stout
11-05-2009, 08:05 AM
So against NE we had our wild cat-like formation, with Orton in motion... and it was actually effective. However, we didn't pull it out in SD or Balt. Where did it go?

I said to myself several times in that Baltimore game that I thought that the Wild Horses formation might create a great benefit for a strugling O-line by confusing or spreading out the D. But, maybe with a struggling O-line such a formation can have more chance of failure.

So what do you think? Where'd it go and when will it come back?

Rabb
11-05-2009, 08:09 AM
I was thinking going into the game last Sunday they would break it out to keep the Ravens off balance and I think they should have, if anything to keep them honest and guessing instead of playing tee ball with Orton

Meck77
11-05-2009, 08:21 AM
I kept saying the same thing during the Ravens game. Not even one attempt to mix it up. With our Oline getting smashed in like a PBR can you'd think he would have tried it.

Irish Stout
11-05-2009, 08:26 AM
I thought the first thing I would see in response would be: "Thats stupid, our O-line couldn't hold up and wild horses would've failed."

I wish we had tried it... really tried anything to get the ball really moving against B-more. I was a little disappointed that Knowshon wasn't given the rock more than 10 times, he was getting decent yardage it seemed. Out of the wild horses it could've been even better yardage.

crush17
11-05-2009, 08:28 AM
McDaniels out coached himself. He knows it. We are gonna come out strong against Pitt!

crowebomber
11-05-2009, 08:43 AM
I think we're a playoff team. And, if I were a coach, I think the smart thing to do would be to keep an ace in the hole that you don't reveal until the playoffs so teams don't game plan for it.

Now, I know we already showed a little bit of it but that was just the test, and it worked, and it got little fanfare because, although it consistently got us positive yardage, there were really no highlight plays out of that formation. So, it's still a bit of a secret.

I mean just think if we wait until the playoffs to bust this out and keep all those defenses in the wrong formation each play. If we did that every week teams would have a game plan to combat it by playoff time.

Just my two cents.

RMT
11-05-2009, 08:48 AM
i agree with crowe - i don't think we've seen the full scale of the Broncos' offense yet ... i expect we'll see things on Monday we haven't seen all season and some we have.

1. wild horse
2. no huddle
3. a reverse or two, especially against an aggressive defense like the steelers who are hurting a bit on the dline

TonyR
11-05-2009, 09:08 AM
Good post. I actually forgot about it until you brought it up!

atomicbloke
11-05-2009, 09:47 AM
I think wild horses will be more effective at home.

It is an audible heavy approach. Trying it away with all the crowd noise means there is a higher possibility of miscommunication and things going wrong....

gyldenlove
11-05-2009, 09:49 AM
I don't think we will use the wild horse against the Steelers, the run D is much better than their pass D so there is no reason to show them run first formations since that plays right into their strength.

I do agree that the no huddle might see some play, but I think we will see a LOT of shotgun snaps and spread offense in this game.

I wouldn't be surprised to see delayed handoffs, bootlegs and such things to keep the Steelers off kilter on defense. It is definitely going to be key to keep the Steelers from getting too aggressive on D so Orton has time to set up and deliver.

We have had a few reverses and end arounds this season and I wouldn't be surprised to see another one against the Steelers, but if I had to say anything look for a flea-flicker or something really exotic like that.

Taco John
11-05-2009, 09:54 AM
I'm not so sure that the Wild Horses formation would have given us favorable match-ups against the Baltimore defense.

bronco militia
11-05-2009, 09:59 AM
I'm not so sure that the Wild Horses formation would have given us favorable match-ups against the Baltimore defense.

it's just something else the defense has to think about....the broncos didn't run it on every play and motioned out of it at times against the pats.

the theory of not running it on the road makes sense (crowd noise)..IMO the broncos offense played not to lose against the ravens

jhns
11-05-2009, 10:01 AM
I don't think it is a formation you can use a lot. It seems pretty easy to game plan for once you know it is there. If Orton stays out wide, there is only so much we can do. It also won't spread the defense out at all. If he moves back under center, he is back to one of our basic formations. It could be used to catch a defense off guard or try confusing them but not when your offense has been getting run over all game. Seeing just a RB in the backfield would have been a dream come true for the Ravens.

Gort
11-05-2009, 10:16 AM
McDaniels out coached himself. He knows it. We are gonna come out strong against Pitt!

yep! i said it sunday. 99% of the loss against the Ravens is on the coaching staff. 1% on the players. bad preparation. bad gameplan. bad playcalling. bad or no adjustments.

Mountain Bronco
11-05-2009, 10:24 AM
WildHorses wouldn't have worked well against the Raven's nor will it work agains the Steelers. I expect lots of screens, reverses, spread shotgun formations this Monday.

Middle of the field is tough against the steelers.

Rabb
11-05-2009, 10:25 AM
yep! i said it sunday. 99% of the loss against the Ravens is on the coaching staff. 1% on the players. bad preparation. bad gameplan. bad playcalling. bad or no adjustments.

I agree....but all of that 1% is Ben Hamilton

kdissette
11-05-2009, 11:46 AM
i think usinig that formation against a 3-4 could be difficult if the LBs have spead and dont fall for fakes.....veterans stand a better chance against the confusion....BAL probably knows better I wouldnt doubt us tryin it on Mon but not using it aggressively unless we have great success at it

Bronco Warrior
11-05-2009, 12:26 PM
i agree with crowe - i don't think we've seen the full scale of the Broncos' offense yet ... i expect we'll see things on Monday we haven't seen all season and some we have.

1. wild horse
2. no huddle
3. a reverse or two, especially against an aggressive defense like the steelers who are hurting a bit on the dline

4. Moving pocket ie roll outs and Bootlegs.

Any of the about would have changed our outcome in Baltimore and making Pitts thin depth at line etc run around wll only help us!

Bronx33
11-05-2009, 12:28 PM
yaaaaaa that would have saved the day for sure...

RMT
11-05-2009, 12:54 PM
4. Moving pocket ie roll outs and Bootlegs.

Any of the about would have changed our outcome in Baltimore and making Pitts thin depth at line etc run around wll only help us!

i doubt that would have changed the outcome but if i'm the Broncos and i have some "change-ups" up my sleeve, i'm not about to reveal them in baltimore with pittsburgh on the horizon.

monday's game is a HUGE tiebreaker game. if the Broncos win they will have tiebreaker advantages with the steelers, bengals, and patriots in the playoffs.

Bronco Warrior
11-05-2009, 12:58 PM
i doubt that would have changed the outcome but if i'm the Broncos and i have some "change-ups" up my sleeve, i'm not about to reveal them in baltimore with pittsburgh on the horizon.

monday's game is a HUGE tiebreaker game. if the Broncos win the will have tiebreaker advantages with the steelers, bengals, and patriots in the playoffs.

Maybe but If you can't pull out the bag of tricks one week and then have more for next week you really aren't much of a offensive genius :( Rollouts and misdirections aren't more than basis stuff..its how you keep agressive defensives honest!

Mountain Bronco
11-05-2009, 02:09 PM
Orton is not as mobile or accurate on the run as our last couple QB's so I doubt you will see a ton of bootlegs and role outs. Maybe sprinkled in here and there, but otherwise, not so much.

Popps
11-05-2009, 04:09 PM
Maybe but If you can't pull out the bag of tricks one week and then have more for next week you really aren't much of a offensive genius :( Rollouts and misdirections aren't more than basis stuff..its how you keep agressive defensives honest!

Yea, it's probably fair to make a career judgment on McDaniels based on one game.

I'm sure he never thought about roll-outs or Wild Horses at any point in that game.

In fact, I'm even more sure that he thought it might work, and intentionally chose not to do it.


In fact, you should get in touch with him and set him straight. Of course, we had a lot of people calling him an idiot during the off-season that are singing a different tune, now. But, I'm sure you're right... and clearly have a better grip on NFL offenses than he does. Call the front office.


Yea, great coaches never lose. McD should win 100% of his games or he's pretty much a joke.

Hogan11
11-05-2009, 04:25 PM
It was probably just pulled out as a joke on Bellicheck.

I'd be surprised if we ever see it again.

LRtagger
11-05-2009, 04:44 PM
LMAO I love all the message board coaches...thinking they could have come up with a better gameplan to beat the Ravens.

Why would Bowlen hire Josh McDaniels when he could have hired Bronco Warrior. buahahahhaha hilarious.

Popps
11-05-2009, 05:19 PM
LMAO I love all the message board coaches...thinking they could have come up with a better gameplan to beat the Ravens. .

Well, these boards are for offering opinions, but c'mon... the guy loses one game and he's suddenly an idiot?

I'm sure it just NEVER crossed McDanilels' mind to throw deep, or keep the Ravens "off-balance."

Sorry, but there wasn't a damned thing we were going to do to keep them off-balance, that day. They were absolutely destroying us at the LOS. No cutsie-poopie bull**** is going to counter that.

You can't throw deep if you don't even have time to set your feet, and you can't establish a run to protect your passing game when your linemen are getting blown back into the backfield and your RB is being met behind the LOS on every play.

We were just outplayed that day. Baltimore is probably a better team.

Doesn't mean our system is broken and it surely doesn't mean that our coach is suddenly a buffoon.... a 6-1 buffoon.

crowebomber
11-05-2009, 09:31 PM
It was probably just pulled out as a joke on Bellicheck.

I'd be surprised if we ever see it again.

Yeah, I'm sure he spent time in practice to create this new-look offense just for a funny joke. I also heard that he loosened curfew rules for a few players the night before the game so they could sneak into Belichick's hotel room and short sheet his bed. :thumbs:

Gort
11-06-2009, 04:32 AM
i doubt that would have changed the outcome but if i'm the Broncos and i have some "change-ups" up my sleeve, i'm not about to reveal them in baltimore with pittsburgh on the horizon.

monday's game is a HUGE tiebreaker game. if the Broncos win they will have tiebreaker advantages with the steelers, bengals, and patriots in the playoffs.

i don't like this analysis. any coach who would purposely put themself in a position to lose a game for such a reason is being too clever by a half.

a W over BAL and a L to PIT is the same in the standings as a L to BAL and a W over PIT. there is no advantage either way. worrying about playoff tiebreakers on the 7th game of the season is putting the cart before the horse.

this team was not going to go 16-0. they won't beat Indy for example. but beating BAL may have been enough to end their season. now, they've given BAL new life and may have to face them again. not a good outcome. better to have driven the stake into BAL's heart last week.

elsid13
11-06-2009, 04:40 AM
i don't like this analysis. any coach who would purposely put themself in a position to lose a game for such a reason is being too clever by a half.

a W over BAL and a L to PIT is the same in the standings as a L to BAL and a W over PIT. there is no advantage either way. worrying about playoff tiebreakers on the 7th game of the season is putting the cart before the horse.

this team was not going to go 16-0. they won't beat Indy for example. but beating BAL may have been enough to end their season. now, they've given BAL new life and may have to face them again. not a good outcome. better to have driven the stake into BAL's heart last week.

Exactly. No one is holding anything back at this point of the season, they are attempting win as many games as possible. They are focused on winning the current game and not the next. What happened was McDaniels and staff were out game planned by team coming off a bye. The Steelers are also coming off a bye so they had two weeks to look at film and figure out how to attack this offense ~ right up the gut. The question can Denver's coaching staff figure out to take advantage of what the Steelers are most likely to do, or will they not have an answer.

Gort
11-06-2009, 04:43 AM
Well, these boards are for offering opinions, but c'mon... the guy loses one game and he's suddenly an idiot?

I'm sure it just NEVER crossed McDanilels' mind to throw deep, or keep the Ravens "off-balance."

Sorry, but there wasn't a damned thing we were going to do to keep them off-balance, that day. They were absolutely destroying us at the LOS. No cutsie-poopie bull**** is going to counter that.

You can't throw deep if you don't even have time to set your feet, and you can't establish a run to protect your passing game when your linemen are getting blown back into the backfield and your RB is being met behind the LOS on every play.

We were just outplayed that day. Baltimore is probably a better team.

Doesn't mean our system is broken and it surely doesn't mean that our coach is suddenly a buffoon.... a 6-1 buffoon.

look at how few plays the Broncos ran before they were down 13-0. not that many. i think perhaps McD was focused so much on establishing the run and short passing game early, that by the time he looked up, we were at halftime.

here are how the Broncos' first half drives went. 28 plays (excluding punts). with 10 of those plays coming on the last drive of the half.

pass-pass-pass-punt
run-pass-run-punt
run-run-run-pass (fumble)
pass-run-run-pass-punt
run-pass-pass-pass-punt
pass-run-pass-pass-run-pass-run-pass-pass-pass-punt

the BAL game got away from McD and his staff before they a) either realized it, or b) they could adjust. that KO return for a TD at the start of the 2nd half was a killer. i thought the right move if DEN had won the toss was to put the Ravens O on the field first, not their D. from the 1st play of the game (a sack), their D set the intensity level for the day and kept it up through 4 quarters.

watermock
11-06-2009, 05:13 AM
Denver was beaten in all 3 phases.

Thus the score.

tnedator
11-06-2009, 07:36 AM
The Wild Horses (Wildcat, Wild Hawg) the way the Broncos ran it vs. New England wasn't effective enough to be a regular part of their offense.

While the runs by Moreno were fairly successful prior to Belicheck's time out, they were not after the TO.

The wrinkle that McD put in, motioning Orton back under center, was a nice one and he completed most or all (I think all) of his passes out of it, but that isn't enough.

The Wild Horses as run by Denver didn't have enough of the misdirection elements that make a Wild Hawg offense effective.

You need to have the threat of two backs to really make it effective. The fact the defense doesn't know if the Wild QB (Moreno in our case, usually Brown in Miami, McFadden in Arkansas) will run the ball or hand it off. WE didn't have the hand off threat.

In Arkansas, where it was highly effective, you had either McFadden and Jones both lined up in Shotgun, with a play fake to Jones, or an actual handoff, or Jones motioning in from out wide as the snap is made, again with the ability to hand off, or fake the handoff.

An effective Wild Hawg offense should allow:


RB1 (taking the snap), to fake a handoff to RB1 who runs wide, while RB1, runs up the middle.
RB1, hands off to RB2 running wide, while RB1 runs up the middle to draw the defense to him.
RB1, fakes a hand off to RB2 who runs up the middle, while RB1 with the ball runs wide.
RB1, hands off to RB2 who runs up the middle, while RB1 without the ball runs wide.
RB1, fakes a handoff to RB2 (typically running up the middle), while RB1 rolls out and attempts a pass to a WR or TE.


Now, there are some variations to that, but you need that threat of the hand off, to both keep the defense from stacking the line, and also to bring in the play action pass.

If the Broncos ran the Wild Horse with Moreno and Buck occupying the RB1 and RB2 spot, but still having Orton in the game to provide a 6th and 7th threat (Orton motioning under center, and Orton 'faking' the motion under the center, but the snap still going to RB1, then it could be a pretty devastating changeup scheme.

bronco militia
11-06-2009, 08:00 AM
The Wild Horses (Wildcat, Wild Hawg) the way the Broncos ran it vs. New England wasn't effective enough to be a regular part of their offense.

While the runs by Moreno were fairly successful prior to Belicheck's time out, they were not after the TO.

The wrinkle that McD put in, motioning Orton back under center, was a nice one and he completed most or all (I think all) of his passes out of it, but that isn't enough.

The Wild Horses as run by Denver didn't have enough of the misdirection elements that make a Wild Hawg offense effective.

You need to have the threat of two backs to really make it effective. The fact the defense doesn't know if the Wild QB (Moreno in our case, usually Brown in Miami, McFadden in Arkansas) will run the ball or hand it off. WE didn't have the hand off threat.

In Arkansas, where it was highly effective, you had either McFadden and Jones both lined up in Shotgun, with a play fake to Jones, or an actual handoff, or Jones motioning in from out wide as the snap is made, again with the ability to hand off, or fake the handoff.

An effective Wild Hawg offense should allow:


RB1 (taking the snap), to fake a handoff to RB1 who runs wide, while RB1, runs up the middle.
RB1, hands off to RB2 running wide, while RB1 runs up the middle to draw the defense to him.
RB1, fakes a hand off to RB2 who runs up the middle, while RB1 with the ball runs wide.
RB1, hands off to RB2 who runs up the middle, while RB1 without the ball runs wide.
RB1, fakes a handoff to RB2 (typically running up the middle), while RB1 rolls out and attempts a pass to a WR or TE.


Now, there are some variations to that, but you need that threat of the hand off, to both keep the defense from stacking the line, and also to bring in the play action pass.

If the Broncos ran the Wild Horse with Moreno and Buck occupying the RB1 and RB2 spot, but still having Orton in the game to provide a 6th and 7th threat (Orton motioning under center, and Orton 'faking' the motion under the center, but the snap still going to RB1, then it could be a pretty devastating changeup scheme.

BULL****......the broncos were getting at least 4-5 yards a run and were able effectively pass out of the formation.

just like the dolphins, you can't run it on every play

Hogan11
11-06-2009, 08:07 AM
Yeah, I'm sure he spent time in practice to create this new-look offense just for a funny joke. I also heard that he loosened curfew rules for a few players the night before the game so they could sneak into Belichick's hotel room and short sheet his bed. :thumbs:

I've seen weirder things happen.

Seriously, because of the trouble Belichick had with it against the Fish, it might've been brought into the playbook specifically for the Patriot game, but who really knows for sure? The fact that it hasn't been seen since is going a long way towards confirming my suspicions on it though.

bronco militia
11-06-2009, 08:08 AM
the broncose had their best day offensively of the year running the wildhorse.

http://library.kraftsportsgroup.com/20091011_gamebook.pdf

tnedator
11-06-2009, 08:08 AM
BULL****......the broncos were getting at least 4-5 yards a run and were able effectively pass out of the formation.

just like the dolphins, you can't run it on every play

Ok, list the running plays after Belichecks timeout. You are saying we averaged 4-5 yards a run after that?

Also, where did I say it should be run every play? Yea, no place.

tnedator
11-06-2009, 10:18 AM
BULL****......the broncos were getting at least 4-5 yards a run and were able effectively pass out of the formation.

just like the dolphins, you can't run it on every play

Here you go Mr. BS. This was just posted in another thread, but is Belicheck talking about why the Dolphins version (very close to the Razorbacks version) is hard to defend:

"They run their regular sweep blocking," Belichick said. "It hits a little bit quicker. If you're not wide enough, then Ricky gets out there on that flat, and if you get out there wide, then it opens up the inside runs for Ronnie after he fakes it.

"They kind of complement those two plays and make them look the same. ... When you are defending one it's kind of hard to defend the other, or you're a little lighter in one or the other. If you try to play them both equally, I'm not sure if you’re good enough at either spot."

That's the threat of TWO running backs, one that run wides and one up the middle, with a variety of fake/options (as I listed above) that keeps the defense off balance as to which running back will run which direction.