PDA

View Full Version : Is the offense buckling under McDaniels' stubbornness?


lex
11-11-2009, 10:34 AM
OK, first of all, McDaniels deserves a lot of credit for the 6-0 start, so this isnt about him being garbage. And he has received a lot of praise for it. But it cuts both ways.

A lot of people are now complaining about a lack of ZBS plays. Ive been trying to give McDaniels the benefit of the doubt in attributing it to a Hamilton hamstring injury. Remember that McDaniels said he wants to run both. Or does he? Is he just reverting back to what he knows from where he came from? NE didnt run a lot of ZBS. Is this stubbornness costing us in the running game?

Also, there has been pressure up the middle on Orton. But one thing you can do to counter this is move the pocket. Have the QB roll out. But we havent seen a lot of this either. Rolling out was fairly common in the old system. So then, is this another instance of stubbornness bogging down the offense?

And the above two issues might be affecting deep throws to back the defense off the LOS. Or is it just Orton choosing (or he is coached up) not to?

Remember when our WRs was a strength of our team? Remember when our offensive line was a strength of our team?

scorpio
11-11-2009, 10:38 AM
http://fergus.files.wordpress.com/2007/02/gone-fishin.jpg

lex
11-11-2009, 10:40 AM
http://fergus.files.wordpress.com/2007/02/gone-fishin.jpg

Sorry to steal your Sunday but McDaniels is not infallible and he's not above reproach.

55CrushEm
11-11-2009, 10:45 AM
I suppose it's a valid question. Every coach to a certain extent that truly believes in his own system, could get "stubborn" about sticking to it faithfully.

But it is also a question we'll never know the answer to. I don't suppose Josh will come out and say, "Yeah, I've been refusing to run the ZBS b/c my system just works better......I just KNOW IT DOES, damn it! **** you! Yes, I'm being stubborn! What are you going to do about it?!?!"

Regardless of what the real reason is of our lack of mixing in the ZBS.....we won't know.

scorpio
11-11-2009, 10:46 AM
Sorry to steal your Sunday but McDaniels is not infallible and he's not above reproach.

I didn't even read your post, sorry.

Popps
11-11-2009, 10:47 AM
http://www.spurgin.net/images/etc/attention_whore.jpg

Popps
11-11-2009, 10:48 AM
I didn't even read your post, sorry.

:rofl:

Beantown Bronco
11-11-2009, 10:50 AM
Regardless of what the real reason is of our lack of mixing in the ZBS.....we won't know.

I wonder if it goes back to something that was touched upon here last week. Most here believe that if Shanny gets a job next year, he'll steal away Dennison and RBs coach Bobby Turner. If so, McDaniels isn't left with a whole lot of coaches who are trusted, experienced and/or well versed in the ZBS. Maybe he's simply planning ahead for the full player AND coaching overhaul that he knew would take 2-3 years to fully realize and already has some new coaches in mind to take over the running game should Shanny return to the NFL.

lex
11-11-2009, 10:50 AM
I didn't even read your post, sorry.

Its fine. Its not like I had high expecations from you anyway.

GreatBronco16
11-11-2009, 10:55 AM
http://www.spurgin.net/images/etc/attention_whore.jpg

Hilarious!

TonyR
11-11-2009, 11:14 AM
...there has been pressure up the middle on Orton. But one thing you can do to counter this is move the pocket. Have the QB roll out. But we havent seen a lot of this either. Rolling out was fairly common in the old system. So then, is this another instance of stubbornness bogging down the offense?


I haven't seen Orton show much ability to throw on the move so I'm not sure this is a good option unfortunately.

jhns
11-11-2009, 11:52 AM
Everyone on offense did not suddenly get worse. The problem is Orton makes everyones job a lot harder and he doesn't release the ball down field to the receivers. They do have deep routes called all the time. We have guys open down field a lot. Orton either doesn't trust himself or he is being coached to play an ultra conservative game. He makes it much harder on the line because he has no idea how to work a pocket. Just look at this last game when he walked into a blocked defender to give him a sack...
As for the run game, it has been a problem since last year. We had a lot of trouble running when we needed, in short yardage situations, or just against bigger defenses. The only reason our ypc was so high is that we would throw 45 times a game and that helped limit the number of defenders playing close to the line. We still could never run against 8 man fronts or in any short yardage situations. To fix this, we need to address the interior of the o-line. I don't think any system will make a big impact.

jhns
11-11-2009, 11:55 AM
I haven't seen Orton show much ability to throw on the move so I'm not sure this is a good option unfortunately.

Also this. That isn't even close to being an option with Orton. I have yet to see him move out of the pocket and make a good throw. He may be able to but I'm not sure what we have seen from him that makes you think he can.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
11-11-2009, 11:58 AM
No, McDaniels is not above reproach. But neither are you, lex, and you should expect this kind of pushback when you start a bull**** thread.

colonelbeef
11-11-2009, 12:00 PM
I haven't seen Orton show much ability to throw on the move so I'm not sure this is a good option unfortunately.

Correct. McDaniels now knows the players and their limitations, he is most certainly trying to tailor the playcalling to their strengths. Unfortunately throwing the ball downfield and hitting receivers in stride is not something Orton is capable of doing with any consistency, and the game planning reflects that.

enjolras
11-11-2009, 12:04 PM
Again... I just don't understand what's so difficult about this.

The offense has been struggling because teams are getting pressure straight up the middle. There is no time to throw the ball deep. There is no time to setup an offense. The defense is penetrating directly into the backfield, so establishing a running game is nearly impossible. Defense in the NFL is really easy when you are able to create mismatches at the line of scrimmage and completely exploit them. That you don't have a running back who is particularly competent in pass protection just makes your issues worse.

The best you can do is try to throw screens or run outside to loosen things up, but when you have the safeties that these teams have....well.... that doesn't work either. The only way you beat these defenses is through excellent interior pass protection, and this team just doesn't have the talent to do that. We need a center and a guard. Badly.

The offenses issues are really the result of playing the two best defensive front-7's in the league in back to back weeks. Just watch, everything will be magically 'fixed' this week. Washington doesn't bring anything resembling that level of physical football to the table.

mr007
11-11-2009, 12:04 PM
Everyone on offense did not suddenly get worse. The problem is Orton makes everyones job a lot harder and he doesn't release the ball down field to the receivers. They do have deep routes called all the time. We have guys open down field a lot. Orton either doesn't trust himself or he is being coached to play an ultra conservative game. He makes it much harder on the line because he has no idea how to work a pocket. Just look at this last game when he walked into a blocked defender to give him a sack...
As for the run game, it has been a problem since last year. We had a lot of trouble running when we needed, in short yardage situations, or just against bigger defenses. The only reason our ypc was so high is that we would throw 45 times a game and that helped limit the number of defenders playing close to the line. We still could never run against 8 man fronts or in any short yardage situations. To fix this, we need to address the interior of the o-line. I don't think any system will make a big impact.

Well said.

TonyR
11-11-2009, 12:05 PM
As for the run game, it has been a problem since last year. We had a lot of trouble running when we needed, in short yardage situations, or just against bigger defenses. The only reason our ypc was so high is that we would throw 45 times a game and that helped limit the number of defenders playing close to the line. We still could never run against 8 man fronts or in any short yardage situations. To fix this, we need to address the interior of the o-line. I don't think any system will make a big impact.

I agree and I don't think a lot of people realize this. It isn't an entirely new problem but I think it's been more glaringly apparent the last couple of games than I can ever recall.

colonelbeef
11-11-2009, 12:06 PM
Again... I just don't understand what's so difficult about this.

The offense has been struggling because teams are getting pressure straight up the middle. There is no time to throw the ball deep. There is no time to setup an offense. The defense is penetrating directly into the backfield, so establishing a running game is nearly impossible. Defense in the NFL is really easy when you are able to create mismatches at the line of scrimmage and completely exploit them. That you don't have a running back who is particularly competent in pass protection just makes your issues worse.

The offenses issues are really the result of playing the two best defensive front-7's in the league in back to back weeks. Just watch, everything will be magically 'fixed' this week. Washington doesn't bring anything resembling that level of physical football to the table.

the OL is not preforming nearly as badly as you seem to think. Orton has had plenty of time to make his reads and throws. Take a look back at some of the sacks, he has time to check down 4 receivers before he stumbles into a defender

colonelbeef
11-11-2009, 12:11 PM
I agree and I don't think a lot of people realize this. It isn't an entirely new problem but I think it's been more glaringly apparent the last couple of games than I can ever recall.

Last year could be at least partially attributed to the fact that the starting RB was at times a FB, or even worse, some loser from a kiosk at the local mall (literally) not to mention a rook LT and 1st year starting RT to go along with relatively green Kuper.

Far less excuses this year. Really, the only major difference, aside from the high #1 spent on Moreno who hasn't shown much, is the QB.

Lets see... only major personnel change is the change from Cutler to Orton, and now the run game AND passing game have gone to ****... hmm....


Occam's razor -the principle that "entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity" and the conclusion, thereof, that the simplest explanation or strategy tends to be the best one.

the reason the offense is struggling to score points is mainly because of Orton and his limitations. This is a better team with a better QB, and Cutler was a better QB. McDaniels has to hold back on the playbook and dink us to infinity because Orton cannot get down the field, period.

Gort
11-11-2009, 12:16 PM
Last year could be at least partially attributed to the fact that the starting RB was at times a FB, or even worse, some loser from a kiosk at the local mall (literally) not to mention a rook LT and 1st year starting RT to go along with relatively green Kuper.

Far less excuses this year. Really, the only major difference, aside from the high #1 spent on Moreno who hasn't shown much, is the QB.

Lets see... only major personnel change is the change from Cutler to Orton, and now the run game AND passing game have gone to ****... hmm....


Occam's razor -the principle that "entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity" and the conclusion, thereof, that the simplest explanation or strategy tends to be the best one.

the reason the offense is struggling to score points is mainly because of Orton and his limitations. This is a better team with a better QB, and Cutler was a better QB. McDaniels has to hold back on the playbook and dink us to infinity because Orton cannot get down the field, period.

the 49ers of the 80's and 90's made their whole reputation on the "dink & dunk" quick slant to the WR.

colonelbeef
11-11-2009, 12:21 PM
the 49ers of the 80's and 90's made their whole reputation on the "dink & dunk" quick slant to the WR.

haha- those teams a) had a run game and b) had a QB that consistently hit his receivers in stride, allowing for huge gains after the catch. Every throw that Orton makes, the receiver either has to a)dive for it or b) stop in his tracks and come back to it. You have been watching the games, so you know this to be true.

I do not know the remedy for it, I just have observed it. If he was hitting Royal or Marshall or Stokley in stride, I am sure we would see quite a few more slants taken for 20+ yard gains. Montana always hit Rice and Taylor in stride, and Young went deep more often

Taco John
11-11-2009, 12:21 PM
I think that this is a fair conversation, and I think the answer is that McDaniels is here to install his system, not extend Shanahan's. I think it's fair to wonder if rather than just bull headed installing his own thing, he might think to adapt his offense and innovate using the tools that he's got. This system has produced 1000 yard rushers for us like no other system that I can ever remember in the history of the game. And it's about to be chucked on the scrap heap.

I think that there's a legitimate discussion about whether the baby should be thrown out with the bath water or not. I mean, why keep Turner or Dennison around? I would say that their days are probably numbered from the looks of things.

I think Bobby Turner belongs in the Ring of Fame.

Gort
11-11-2009, 12:27 PM
haha- those teams a) had a run game and b) had a QB that consistently hit his receivers in stride, allowing for huge gains after the catch. Every throw that Orton makes, the receiver either has to a)dive for it or b) stop in his tracks and come back to it. You have been watching the games, so you know this to be true.

I do not know the remedy for it, I just have observed it. If he was hitting Royal or Marshall or Stokley in stride, I am sure we would see quite a few more slants taken for 20+ yard gains. Montana always hit Rice and Taylor in stride, and Young went deep more often

so if we could get Orton to hit the quick slant consistently, then you'd be happy with him at QB? or is there no circumstance under which you'd ever accept him back there?

lex
11-11-2009, 12:29 PM
No, McDaniels is not above reproach. But neither are you, lex, and you should expect this kind of pushback when you start a bull**** thread.

The lilliputian mafia is predictable, dude.

lex
11-11-2009, 12:35 PM
Again... I just don't understand what's so difficult about this.

The offense has been struggling because teams are getting pressure straight up the middle. There is no time to throw the ball deep. There is no time to setup an offense. The defense is penetrating directly into the backfield, so establishing a running game is nearly impossible. Defense in the NFL is really easy when you are able to create mismatches at the line of scrimmage and completely exploit them. That you don't have a running back who is particularly competent in pass protection just makes your issues worse.

The best you can do is try to throw screens or run outside to loosen things up, but when you have the safeties that these teams have....well.... that doesn't work either. The only way you beat these defenses is through excellent interior pass protection, and this team just doesn't have the talent to do that. We need a center and a guard. Badly.

The offenses issues are really the result of playing the two best defensive front-7's in the league in back to back weeks. Just watch, everything will be magically 'fixed' this week. Washington doesn't bring anything resembling that level of physical football to the table.

Once again, one observation that has been made is that a counter to this is having a fullback. Or, in actuality, the defense might be more aggressive at attacking the middle because of the lack of a fullback to pick off defenders up the middle.

So, again, does that speak to stubbornness?

TheElusiveKyleOrton
11-11-2009, 12:39 PM
The lilliputian mafia is predictable, dude.

So you are above reproach? What's your record as an NFL head coach?

lex
11-11-2009, 12:41 PM
So you are above reproach? What's your record as an NFL head coach?

Like I said, the lilliputian mafia is predictable. Your question was answered in my previous response.

oubronco
11-11-2009, 12:41 PM
I think that this is a fair conversation, and I think the answer is that McDaniels is here to install his system, not extend Shanahan's. I think it's fair to wonder if rather than just bull headed installing his own thing, he might think to adapt his offense and innovate using the tools that he's got. This system has produced 1000 yard rushers for us like no other system that I can ever remember in the history of the game. And it's about to be chucked on the scrap heap.

I think that there's a legitimate discussion about whether the baby should be thrown out with the bath water or not. I mean, why keep Turner or Dennison around? I would say that their days are probably numbered from the looks of things.

I think Bobby Turner belongs in the Ring of Fame.

Yes I agree that Mcd is going to scrap the ZBS for a more pass blocking scheme but I think that lex has a point about him maybe being a little stubborn in his thinking, why else would he run a stupid bubble screen on short yardage when we have Hillis and Larsen to lead block or run the ball

TheElusiveKyleOrton
11-11-2009, 12:45 PM
Like I said, the lilliputian mafia is predictable. Your question was answered in my previous response.

So is that a yes? The little people mafia has nothing to do with what I asked your stupid egotistical ass.

RMT
11-11-2009, 12:46 PM
"This message is hidden because lex is on your ignore list."

not sure if I should respond to your above initial post. it's the same as all of your other ones. nothing's changed.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
11-11-2009, 12:49 PM
"This message is hidden because lex is on your ignore list."

not sure if I should respond to your above initial post. it's the same as all of your other ones. nothing's changed.

He was just waiting for the Broncos to lose a couple so he could come back and start bull**** threads like this one.

Luckily, they lost two in a row. BULLY FOR LEX!

Soul-Bronco
11-11-2009, 12:53 PM
Could it be the fact that we played the top two defense's the last two weeks both RESTED after coming off BYE weeks?

Its not really that hard to see that a whole new offensive overload isnt complete and running on all cylinders game 8 of te season

lazarus4444
11-11-2009, 01:10 PM
@Soul-Bronco,

Not only that we are still learning a new system but you are right about us facing the two toughest defenses in back to back weeks. Every defense we face will not be like the last two (thank God!). But, BAL & PIT will be in the playoffs and if we expect to go anywhere we need to be able to go toe to toe with them.

Right now, their interior defensive lines are dominating our interior O-Line. Heck, they are bitch slapping them left and right and abusing them. They're not only taking our interior lines lunch money but sleeping with their mom after school too. That has to stop if we're going to compete with those guys.

I fully expect to get on a winning streak starting this week and continuing with the chargers after that.

chex
11-11-2009, 01:13 PM
Could it be the fact that we played the top two defense's the last two weeks both RESTED after coming off BYE weeks?

Its not really that hard to see that a whole new offensive overload isnt complete and running on all cylinders game 8 of te season

We were averaging 133 yards rushing per game prior to playing the Steelers & Ravens, which is top 10 territory. It's obvious we do not match up well with power defenses like these, and this is something McDaniels will address in the offseason, as he will any other areas that show themselves to be deficient.

Has anyone seen the size of the interior line the Steelers have? All are well over 300 pounds, and while weight alone doesn't make you a good OL, it does go to show how a team like the Steelers has such great success year in and year out running the ball.

lex
11-11-2009, 01:22 PM
We were averaging 133 yards rushing per game prior to playing the Steelers & Ravens, which is top 10 territory. It's obvious we do not match up well with power defenses like these, and this is something McDaniels will address in the offseason, as he will any other areas that show themselves to be deficient.

Has anyone seen the size of the interior line the Steelers have? All are well over 300 pounds, and while weight alone doesn't make you a good OL, it does go to show how a team like the Steelers has such great success year in and year out running the ball.

If the ZBS would have worked better and if the running game would have been more successful with a fullback, the issue of stubbornness, nevertheless, remains in play.

BTW, you dont play teams like Oakland and Cleveland in the playoffs...theres a decent chance that, if we make the playoffs, they will play either Pittsburgh, Baltimore, or both. Stats that were impacted by games agains Oakland and Cleveland wont help much then.

chex
11-11-2009, 01:29 PM
BTW, you dont play teams like Oakland and Cleveland in the playoffs...theres a decent chance that, if we make the playoffs, they will play either Pittsburgh, Baltimore, or both. Stats that were impacted by games agains Oakland and Cleveland wont help much then.

Of course we don't, which might be a good thing since we've had our share of tough games with them over the past few years.

We aren't good enough to stand up to defenses like the Steelers and Ravens. Period. We have to get better players to deal with them, which I am confident we will. We need to bulk up in the middle to deal with teams imposing their will on us up front. Peyton Hillis isn't going to help his line from becoming overwhelmed.

Peoples Champ
11-11-2009, 01:31 PM
OK, first of all, McDaniels deserves a lot of credit for the 6-0 start, so this isnt about him being garbage. And he has received a lot of praise for it. But it cuts both ways.

A lot of people are now complaining about a lack of ZBS plays. Ive been trying to give McDaniels the benefit of the doubt in attributing it to a Hamilton hamstring injury. Remember that McDaniels said he wants to run both. Or does he? Is he just reverting back to what he knows from where he came from? NE didnt run a lot of ZBS. Is this stubbornness costing us in the running game?

Also, there has been pressure up the middle on Orton. But one thing you can do to counter this is move the pocket. Have the QB roll out. But we havent seen a lot of this either. Rolling out was fairly common in the old system. So then, is this another instance of stubbornness bogging down the offense?

And the above two issues might be affecting deep throws to back the defense off the LOS. Or is it just Orton choosing (or he is coached up) not to?

Remember when our WRs was a strength of our team? Remember when our offensive line was a strength of our team?



I think our Offense buckled because we played 2 really good defenses. One with Ed Reed and ray lewis, and one with reigning MVP James Harrison and Troy Polamalu.

I expect it to pick back up, and if we see those teams in the playoffs, lets hope we make adjustments.

Bronco Yoda
11-11-2009, 02:53 PM
I want to see Hillis getting the ball in short down situations. I don''t care what system we're using. What QB we have. What team we're playing or who's our coach.... or even how the stars are aligned on a particular game day. Just put Hillis in there more!

elsid13
11-11-2009, 04:04 PM
Yes he stubborn, most coaches that have been successful with a style of play will stick to that playing style until something major happens and forces them to change.

Now, people need to remember that first 5 to 6 games there is enough tape on offense for defenses to get a go read on what they are attempting to. Now there enough tape that there is no longer a scheme advantage, it comes down to talent.

Gort
11-11-2009, 04:09 PM
@Soul-Bronco,

Not only that we are still learning a new system but you are right about us facing the two toughest defenses in back to back weeks. Every defense we face will not be like the last two (thank God!). But, BAL & PIT will be in the playoffs and if we expect to go anywhere we need to be able to go toe to toe with them.

Right now, their interior defensive lines are dominating our interior O-Line. Heck, they are b**** slapping them left and right and abusing them. They're not only taking our interior lines lunch money but sleeping with their mom after school too. That has to stop if we're going to compete with those guys.

I fully expect to get on a winning streak starting this week and continuing with the chargers after that.

BAL is 4-4. they are NOT going to the playoffs. we should have beat those jokers.

NYBronco
11-11-2009, 04:57 PM
I don't think it's McDaniels other then he needs a few more offseasons to bring in key players to build on his team makeover.

I think it has more to do with our opposition the past two weeks. Pittsburgh the defending SB Champions and Baltimore losing out to Pittsburgh last year in the AFC Championship sending Pittsburgh to the SB. Both teams have well established organizations and consistency in offensive and defensive coaching and player personnel. Denver is in it's first year of major changes from top to bottom.

Orton needs better protection to be effective in the passing game. The running game needs better blocking execution to be effective.

colonelbeef
11-11-2009, 09:10 PM
so if we could get Orton to hit the quick slant consistently, then you'd be happy with him at QB? or is there no circumstance under which you'd ever accept him back there?

Completely... I actually have come to like Orton to a degree, you have to admire his toughness and willingness to stand in the pocket and take hits, and he definitely is more likable than Cutler was. Guy is big, tough, is in command of the huddle, and knows the playbook. If he was just a little more mobile and had a bit better of an arm, and I'd be totally on board.

DenverBrit
11-11-2009, 09:54 PM
So, again, does that speak to stubbornness?

Only yours.

HAT
11-11-2009, 10:23 PM
BAL is 4-4. they are NOT going to the playoffs. we should have beat those jokers.

I hope you are right but I'm not ready to discount them yet....

They have a tough 3 game stretch coming up (after Cleveland next week)

INDY
PITT
@GB

If they can win 2 out of those 3 (and it's a big if) it will be hard for them to not to finish at least at 10-6 with a remaining schedule of:

DET
CHI
@Pitt
@OAK

They need to hope that Cincy wins the division & not Pitt since Cincy has swept them and they still control their own destiny vs. Pitt.

And they already own the tie breaker over the eventual AFCW runner up.

It's going to be a great December with 6 teams (DEN/SD/Cincy/Balt/Pitt/HOU) battling it out for four spots. Especially with all the head to head going on between the AFCW & AFCN

Taco John
11-11-2009, 10:40 PM
I think stubborn is a good trait to have. Not all the time, but sometimes it's just what the doctor ordered.

SoCalBronco
11-11-2009, 11:48 PM
Personally, everything else being equal, I would prefer the ZBS. It's proven. It has a better track record than any other running scheme out there. It provides a competitive advantage because one can shift precious resources elsewhere and get by on the cheap at RB using the system to make up for talent (up to a point). We also have two highly trained experts in installing and coaching people up in that scheme. The OL is also quite familiar and comfortable with the system. Even more importantly, they all fit the system well. A couple days ago I advocated using more of it because it would help to smoothen the transition to the new running style (OL is having some issues with the new scheme and using something they are familiar with would provide a short term boost to the run game problems).

But even that doesn't solve the issues. The problems and concerns go deeper. There are two other things that create difficulty. The first is largely just theoretical, but its still important. It is simply a matter of autonomy. Josh is the HC and he should install the running system he feels best about. After all, it is his offense. There's something inherently problematic about asking someone to run something they don't believe in, or at least, that they don't believe in as much as they would something else. The other problem is one of practicality. There are at least two practical problems that would hamper (at least to some extent) Josh's efforts to use ZBS even if he wanted to. First is a personnel issue. While the line fits the system well, Moreno who is quite talented, is more of a dancer and shifter. He's a very creative runner, but doesn't seem like the type of guy that would thrive in a pure one cut and go type of scheme. He needs to be able to move and dance around rather than have a rigid read assignment after allowing the blocks to develop. Buckhalter doesn't fit the scheme, either. He's at his best on tosses to the outside where he can beat the defense to the corner, as well as draws from the shotgun. Hillis is a proven ZBS runner, but because of fumble issues and perhaps some other reasons that we're not privy too, the staff doesn't appear to feature him. The second problem is that of complementary plays. When Denver was at its best in running the ZBS, it had a viable PA boot game to complement it. This allowed us to run even against 8 man fronts with 7 blockers (because the backside end man on the line of scrimmage on (EMOL), usually a defensive end, could not pursue, but rather had to worry about Plummer or Cutler whipping around after the PA fake and either throwing a pass or running the ball). McDaniels doesn't have that luxury. Orton's mobility is ****. He can't do the complementary things required to keep the EMOL in check. The EMOL does not fear the PA bootleg. He doesn't have to stay back and contain. The only way you can force him to think twice about pursuing from the backside is the reverse and we don't do that a whole lot, anyway. You will notice that virtually all PA passes we've thrown this season are in the pocket, almost no boots. It's not completely because we dont like it, its also because we can't do it.

fontaine
11-12-2009, 06:27 AM
We aren't good enough to stand up to defenses like the Steelers and Ravens. Period. We have to get better players to deal with them, which I am confident we will. We need to bulk up in the middle to deal with teams imposing their will on us up front. Peyton Hillis isn't going to help his line from becoming overwhelmed.

Sorry, but that's the coward's way out. Most teams in our schedule have their strengths but that shouldn't mean Denver just use it as an excuse.

Yes Hamilton played badly and Pitt exploited that by sending up pressure in that direction.

But that's what good coaching is all about. Hiding weakenesses and focusing on strengths.

If McDaniels doesn't want to use the ZBS to hide our smaller interior, fine. My question is: What's his alternative?

Look, just because you have a Guard that can't handle elite NTs (and not many Guards can) and you don't want to run ZBS plays doesn't mean you don't help the guy out.

How many times did we pass out of two back sets to bury that pressure up the middle? None.

How many times did we use Quinn or Graham as an H-Back to block? Graham is one of the best blockers in the league. Did McDaniels plant his a$$ in the backfield to stop the interior push? No.

Did he motion over Graham when James Harrison lined up over the A/B gaps? No.

I can't remember a single passing play where we used two backs to stop that pressure and honestly it wasn't as if Orton was running around for his life.

What compounds the problem is that we use the short passing game not as a part of our offense but the entire offense so good defenses can just sit their safeties and LBers on those short areas.

Our WRs were getting open so that's not the problem. Either we put in more ZBS plays to run the ball or we help out the interior with additional blockers in the passing/running game if you want to man block.

If you can't gameplan around a weak Guard and an undersized C when you've got great TEs/WRs, good RBs, a good QB and the rest of the line is fine then you've got no business being in this league as a coach.

Obviously other teams did gameplan effectively against the Steelers because plenty of other offenses put up a ton of points against them.

I expect McDaniels will rise to the challenge though if we face similar 3-4 fronts or the same teams in the playoffs. He doesn't strike me as a coach who makes the same mistake twice.

chex
11-12-2009, 07:13 AM
Sorry, but that's the coward's way out. Most teams in our schedule have their strengths but that shouldn't mean Denver just use it as an excuse.



Dude, what the eff are you talking about? Who's making excuses? It's fact.

Do you really believe we're on par with teams like the Steelers? Seriously?

There's a reason they've won the Super Bowl twice in the last four years while we've struggled to tread water. This is why you have good teams and not so good teams. Your rationale offers that even the Lions should be able to beat anyone, since being overmatched or out-personneld is a flimsy excuse to you.

fontaine
11-12-2009, 12:42 PM
Dude, what the eff are you talking about? Who's making excuses? It's fact.

Do you really believe we're on par with teams like the Steelers? Seriously?

There's a reason they've won the Super Bowl twice in the last four years while we've struggled to tread water. This is why you have good teams and not so good teams. Your rationale offers that even the Lions should be able to beat anyone, since being overmatched or out-personneld is a flimsy excuse to you.

That's all fine and good, but not what you said.

You said:
We aren't good enough to stand up to defenses like the Steelers and Ravens. Period.

You want to believe this offense isn't good enough to get it done against those defenses then fine, believe what you want to believe.

I don't believe that. Is that so hard to understand?

But speaking of Detroit, their offense hung 20 points on this Pitt D who had Clark/Timmons playing.

But nevermind, Detroit's apparently good enough to stand up against that defense, but we're not, period, right?

chex
11-12-2009, 01:22 PM
That's all fine and good, but not what you said.

You said:


You want to believe this offense isn't good enough to get it done against those defenses then fine, believe what you want to believe.

I don't believe that. Is that so hard to understand?

But speaking of Detroit, their offense hung 20 points on this Pitt D who had Clark/Timmons playing.

But nevermind, Detroit's apparently good enough to stand up against that defense, but we're not, period, right?

Yeah, it is what I believe. I don't know what game you watched Monday night, but in the game I watched, I saw our interior line get manhandled. I saw pressure up the middle all night, I saw zero running lanes, and I saw on the other end what a stout line can do.

We've been dominated by opposing defenses the last couple of games, for whatever reason you choose to say. I don't know what more evidence is needed that this team is not ready to mix it up successfully with power defenses.

Hulamau
11-12-2009, 01:42 PM
Personally, everything else being equal, I would prefer the ZBS. It's proven. It has a better track record than any other running scheme out there. It provides a competitive advantage because one can shift precious resources elsewhere and get by on the cheap at RB using the system to make up for talent (up to a point). We also have two highly trained experts in installing and coaching people up in that scheme. The OL is also quite familiar and comfortable with the system. Even more importantly, they all fit the system well. A couple days ago I advocated using more of it because it would help to smoothen the transition to the new running style (OL is having some issues with the new scheme and using something they are familiar with would provide a short term boost to the run game problems).

But even that doesn't solve the issues. The problems and concerns go deeper. There are two other things that create difficulty. The first is largely just theoretical, but its still important. It is simply a matter of autonomy. Josh is the HC and he should install the running system he feels best about. After all, it is his offense. There's something inherently problematic about asking someone to run something they don't believe in, or at least, that they don't believe in as much as they would something else. The other problem is one of practicality. There are at least two practical problems that would hamper (at least to some extent) Josh's efforts to use ZBS even if he wanted to. First is a personnel issue. While the line fits the system well, Moreno who is quite talented, is more of a dancer and shifter. He's a very creative runner, but doesn't seem like the type of guy that would thrive in a pure one cut and go type of scheme. He needs to be able to move and dance around rather than have a rigid read assignment after allowing the blocks to develop. Buckhalter doesn't fit the scheme, either. He's at his best on tosses to the outside where he can beat the defense to the corner, as well as draws from the shotgun. Hillis is a proven ZBS runner, but because of fumble issues and perhaps some other reasons that we're not privy too, the staff doesn't appear to feature him. The second problem is that of complementary plays. When Denver was at its best in running the ZBS, it had a viable PA boot game to complement it. This allowed us to run even against 8 man fronts with 7 blockers (because the backside end man on the line of scrimmage on (EMOL), usually a defensive end, could not pursue, but rather had to worry about Plummer or Cutler whipping around after the PA fake and either throwing a pass or running the ball). McDaniels doesn't have that luxury. Orton's mobility is ****. He can't do the complementary things required to keep the EMOL in check. The EMOL does not fear the PA bootleg. He doesn't have to stay back and contain. The only way you can force him to think twice about pursuing from the backside is the reverse and we don't do that a whole lot, anyway. You will notice that virtually all PA passes we've thrown this season are in the pocket, almost no boots. It's not completely because we dont like it, its also because we can't do it.

As you noted at the end, Orton doesn't strike me as an ideal ZBS QB and I have little doubt that has factored into the decision, though not the only reason less of it has been featured.

If I recall both Simms and Brandstater showed more lateral roll out tendency in their brief PS appearances. For all of Orton's several real strengths mobility isn't one of them and McD knows that . You cant really coach him up to be agile and quick on his feet all of a sudden.

A guard and center than could give him another 1/2 second in the pocket though and the last two games might have been a lot closer.

Ambiguous
11-12-2009, 03:14 PM
Could it be the fact that we played the top two defense's the last two weeks both RESTED after coming off BYE weeks?

Its not really that hard to see that a whole new offensive overload isnt complete and running on all cylinders game 8 of te season

Baltimore and Pitt are ranked 15th and 17th respectively overall. And that's with our struggling O to pad their stats, just sayin.

watermock
11-12-2009, 03:57 PM
He's a very creative runner, but doesn't seem like the type of guy that would thrive in a pure one cut and go type of scheme. He needs to be able to move and dance around rather than have a rigid read assignment after allowing the blocks to develop. Buckhalter doesn't fit the scheme, either. He's at his best on tosses to the outside where he can beat the defense to the corner, as well as draws from the shotgun.

Wrong. He's the most similar back to TD since TD, unless you want to compare him to Winder. Moreno is looking very average in all areas.

We dont even see the rest of the class, especially Quinn. Where was he Monday? Not playing H-Back!~

Ayers? meh. For 3 firsts, jury's out to lunch.

Also, regarding Buchalter, I loved him 5 years ago, but to call him an edge runner now is a reach.Also, he has a serious history of injury, but he's a compeditor.

Your absolutely right about the limitations of said QB. SLOTH. He might be able to catch a 45 y/o Cougar, but he cant outrun even a DT.

The problem isn't the line. It's the inability to escape the pocket and the man blocking.

Unless Orton OR MARSHALL can pull more rabbits out of the hat, we better get these next 2.

We got 6, and 3 more against poor teams, but honestly, this team isn't compeditive offensively. Untill it is, it's 1 and done in December.

watermock
11-12-2009, 04:01 PM
Sorry, but that's the coward's way out. Most teams in our schedule have their strengths but that shouldn't mean Denver just use it as an excuse.

Yes Hamilton played badly and Pitt exploited that by sending up pressure in that direction.

But that's what good coaching is all about. Hiding weakenesses and focusing on strengths.

If McDaniels doesn't want to use the ZBS to hide our smaller interior, fine. My question is: What's his alternative?

Look, just because you have a Guard that can't handle elite NTs (and not many Guards can) and you don't want to run ZBS plays doesn't mean you don't help the guy out.

How many times did we pass out of two back sets to bury that pressure up the middle? None.

How many times did we use Quinn or Graham as an H-Back to block? Graham is one of the best blockers in the league. Did McDaniels plant his a$$ in the backfield to stop the interior push? No.

Did he motion over Graham when James Harrison lined up over the A/B gaps? No.

I can't remember a single passing play where we used two backs to stop that pressure and honestly it wasn't as if Orton was running around for his life.

What compounds the problem is that we use the short passing game not as a part of our offense but the entire offense so good defenses can just sit their safeties and LBers on those short areas.

Our WRs were getting open so that's not the problem. Either we put in more ZBS plays to run the ball or we help out the interior with additional blockers in the passing/running game if you want to man block.

If you can't gameplan around a weak Guard and an undersized C when you've got great TEs/WRs, good RBs, a good QB and the rest of the line is fine then you've got no business being in this league as a coach.

Obviously other teams did gameplan effectively against the Steelers because plenty of other offenses put up a ton of points against them.

I expect McDaniels will rise to the challenge though if we face similar 3-4 fronts or the same teams in the playoffs. He doesn't strike me as a coach who makes the same mistake twice.


Exellent.