PDA

View Full Version : Mike Nolan is a great coach BUT...........


Bronco Rob
12-21-2009, 02:58 AM
how on God's green earth do you NOT BLITZ jabba-marcus on that last drive?

When jabba is QB you send everyone!


That is all.

fontaine
12-21-2009, 06:55 AM
1. The four man line was constantly getting pressure already, knocking lumps out of Frye who was forced to run out of pocket. It was the same with Jabba.

2. You need all of you extra defenders to flood the secondary to stop the passes.

3. How could Nolan have known that our first round pick (Smith) would give up that retarded pass interfernce penalty that accounted for their longest passing play?

Hercules Rockefeller
12-21-2009, 06:57 AM
3. How could Nolan have known that our first round pick (Smith) would give up that retarded pass interfernce penalty that accounted for their longest passing play?

Maybe because it was Andre Goodman?

Traveler
12-21-2009, 06:58 AM
Mike Nolan is the main reason this team has won eight games this season when many expected no more than 4-5 wins.

It's the offense that is holding us back at this point in time.

WolfpackGuy
12-21-2009, 07:02 AM
The game shouldn't have come down to the defense making a stop.

The offense needs to put the ball in the fuggin endzone when it's inside the 5!!!

But yeah, they should've been blitzing the hell out of the QB on the final drive.

55CrushEm
12-21-2009, 07:15 AM
The game shouldn't have come down to the defense making a stop.

The offense needs to put the ball in the fuggin endzone when it's inside the 5!!!
But yeah, they should've been blitzing the hell out of the QB on the final drive.

This. Once again, we are settling for field goals FAR too often. 4 FGs, and only 1 TD......just bad.

bloodsunday
12-21-2009, 07:15 AM
I thought they should have been more aggressive as well to force the issue. Oakland may have still scored, but we need more time. I think Prater could have kicked one from 60. So forcing the issue and hoping for a turnover or more time was a decent play, IMO.

Broncomutt
12-21-2009, 07:20 AM
The defense has been betrayed by the offense all year. Yeah the D played to lose on that last drive, but this team's woes are the fault of McDaniels and and an incompetent offense.

bloodsunday
12-21-2009, 07:20 AM
This. Once again, we are settling for field goals FAR too often. 4 FGs, and only 1 TD......just bad.

Yeah and it translates to the short yardage in general. We converted 1 of 4 from 3rd and 3 or less -- a 4 yd pass in which Stokley made a great catch. After we stopped Oakland on the goal line, we need to convert a 3rd and 1 and couldn't do it. That was a HUGE play.

bronco militia
12-21-2009, 07:23 AM
The defense has been betrayed by the offense all year. Yeah the D played to lose on that last drive, but this team's woes are the fault of McDaniels and and an incompetent offense.

letting three different raider QB's score 20 points at Invesco is pathetic if you ask me....

oubronco
12-21-2009, 07:24 AM
1. The four man line was constantly getting pressure already, knocking lumps out of Frye who was forced to run out of pocket. It was the same with Jabba.

2. You need all of you extra defenders to flood the secondary to stop the passes.

3. How could Nolan have known that our first round pick (Smith) would give up that retarded pass interfernce penalty that accounted for their longest passing play?

Yep worked out real well didn't it

and that PI against Goodman was bogus

colonelbeef
12-21-2009, 07:27 AM
The defense has been by far the strength of this team.

This loss lies squarely on McDaniels and Orton.

azbroncfan
12-21-2009, 07:30 AM
This. Once again, we are settling for field goals FAR too often. 4 FGs, and only 1 TD......just bad.

Yep the above statement leads to a loss 90 percent of the time from inside the 5.

CEH
12-21-2009, 08:02 AM
This has nothing to do with the defense. Punch it in with 8 to go and the D gives up 13 maybe another 7 in garbage time or the D gives the ball back to the O with 4 minutes to go and they lose 9 yards and use up 10 seconds throwing on 3rd and 19 . There's another 40 seconds the D could have used on the last drive

This loss falls squarely on McD and the O

Crushaholic
12-21-2009, 08:40 AM
No, it doesn't fall squarely on the O. Our redzone efficiency HAS to improve, but we could have won if the defense had stopped Russell...

bpc
12-21-2009, 09:23 AM
Mike Nolan's defense is the only reason we are at this position to make the playoffs, however, that last drive was pretty much pathetic. I understand the thinking behind it, but JaLardcus has never been able to read defenses under pressure. He just doesn't have it in him. We gave 60 yds of cushion and he got comfortable, in a rhythm and moved the ball down the field on us. It wasn't until the redzone when we started throwing blitzes at him and we almost got a few turnovers off of it. I just thought it was a really poorly called drive. Know the ratios, know the tendency's, and exploit them.

So what if you blitz a guy, who is prone to bad decision making and he burns you? Then what, we have a minute left to go on the clock with 1 timeout? 1:15? I just don't understand the thinking and as crappy as the offense was... (it was terrible), that last drive lost the game for us because of indecision and tentative play.

Mediator12
12-21-2009, 11:23 AM
Any team that gives up 200+ rushing yards against a team that has had ZERO success throwing the ball all game, needs to be examined. The "D" does not get a pass here because they have been pretty good all year. Yes, they get kudos for having DEN in an excellent position to make the playoffs with some stellar play.

However, the front seven is getting their asses kicked, Again, down the stretch of games and the year. This is what happens when the Front seven is predicated on smoke and mirrors and not talent. That the Raiders pushed both of DEN's lines around yesterday is absolutely unexcusable.

So, While the Offense also screwed up the Win by not scoring, AGAIN, the defense shares all kinds of culpability for not stopping the worst Passing offense down the stretch by being passive, tentative, and loose. This is the kind of thing they have done all year to secure a Broncos victory. To be so bad versus the Raiders when it counted most is flat out terrible. No, excuses for that. None. They had a chance to win it for DEN and simply failed.

bpc
12-21-2009, 11:59 AM
Any team that gives up 200+ rushing yards against a team that has had ZERO success throwing the ball all game, needs to be examined. The "D" does not get a pass here because they have been pretty good all year. Yes, they get kudos for having DEN in an excellent position to make the playoffs with some stellar play.

However, the front seven is getting their asses kicked, Again, down the stretch of games and the year. This is what happens when the Front seven is predicated on smoke and mirrors and not talent. That the Raiders pushed both of DEN's lines around yesterday is absolutely unexcusable.

So, While the Offense also screwed up the Win by not scoring, AGAIN, the defense shares all kinds of culpability for not stopping the worst Passing offense down the stretch by being passive, tentative, and loose. This is the kind of thing they have done all year to secure a Broncos victory. To be so bad versus the Raiders when it counted most is flat out terrible. No, excuses for that. None. They had a chance to win it for DEN and simply failed.

I do agree. Denver needed to get Oakland into passing situations and we did not. This makes the stupid OT screen pass call in the redzone, all the more appalling. STICK TO THE SCRIPT MCD! We needed to take advantage of the 1st quarter domination we had. Unfortunately we only mustered 6 pts out of it.

As for the rush defense, we're severely light on that front. We don't have the ideal NT to run the 3-4, at least not one who can make an impact. The DE's are backup types from other 3-4 units, and converted 4-3 DT's. The LB's in general lack playmaking skills outside of Elvis rushing the passer. One can still point out he has issues in converage and playing the run. Hagan, Davis (even though he had some nice plays yesterday), and DJ, are just guys right now. I saw DJ and Davis running into the back of their DL more times than not yesterday and wide open holes popping up, and Bush squirting through them for huge gains.

We need more front 7 playmakers. I just hope that Denver is in position this draft to draft a Gerald McCoy type, or a Derrick Morgan. Both would have instant impacts against both the run and pass.

Dagmar
12-21-2009, 12:05 PM
1. The four man line was constantly getting pressure already, knocking lumps out of Frye who was forced to run out of pocket. It was the same with Jabba.

2. You need all of you extra defenders to flood the secondary to stop the passes.

3. How could Nolan have known that our first round pick (Smith) would give up that retarded pass interfernce penalty that accounted for their longest passing play?

Sums up the orangemane. Vendetta's that last a lifetime.

DenverBrit
12-21-2009, 12:12 PM
Eventually the lack of talent will catch up with a team.

We've seen it before and it wasn't all going to be fixed in one off-season.

Pontius Pirate
12-21-2009, 12:41 PM
Correction - he is a good ASSISTANT coach

tsiguy96
12-21-2009, 12:59 PM
Eventually the lack of talent will catch up with a team.

We've seen it before and it wasn't all going to be fixed in one off-season.

basically this. and people putting this loss on orton are joking, hes not a gamebreaker but if he could get any help at all from the running game it would be a bit different.

barryr
12-21-2009, 02:16 PM
The Broncos simply can't covert 3rd and short running plays and their RT right now, can't even block a 35 years old.

Only the idiots I can tell are blaming Orton. If anyone can prove he is missing wide open receivers all the time, let us know. Until then, shove it.

MplsBronco
12-21-2009, 03:14 PM
The Broncos simply can't covert 3rd and short running plays and their RT right now, can't even block a 35 years old.

Only the idiots I can tell are blaming Orton. If anyone can prove he is missing wide open receivers all the time, let us know. Until then, shove it.

No shiat. Let's conveniently ignore the 240 yards given up on the ground. The D still gave up 20 points with the O not turning the ball over. Charlie Frye was looking pretty damn good and lets not forget letting the worst QB in the league lead a gamewinnig drive.

Then there is the absolute inabilty to convert short yardage situations and the terrible playcalling. Orton is far from perfect but there are bigger issues with this team.

I have been behind McD 100% but he is really disappointing at this point in time. People need to get off Orton's back.

Bronx33
12-21-2009, 04:10 PM
Yep we pooped the bed lets get ready for philly lets see how our boys react to the tough faider loss.

Broncomutt
12-21-2009, 04:22 PM
letting three different raider QB's score 20 points at Invesco is pathetic if you ask me....

I agree with you 100%. But given that the Defense has "fought the good fight" for the majority of the season, I'm gonna cut them some slack on a day where once again the offense simply can't get their **** together.

I swear the Defense must sit on the sidelines (in the 97 seconds our "three and out" offense affords them) and wonder, "If the offense won't give 100%, why should we?"

A great Defense would have beaten the Raiders on their own. This Defense is not great. But Nolan has done faaaaaaaaaar more with the D than McDaniels has with the O.

NYBronco
12-21-2009, 04:24 PM
Defense lost the raider game to a bunch of backup pathetic QB's and 240 yards of rushing. Couldn't stop J Russ and the almighty raiders when the game was on the line.

Raider Bill
12-21-2009, 05:07 PM
I didn't understand that call either. Your DC had a 4 man rush / cover 2 shell vs an immoble guy with no pocket presence..

Washington played a "rush to cover" scheme (if the man you're covering doesnt release then blitz) and Russell couldnt do anything.

tsiguy96
12-21-2009, 05:40 PM
I agree with you 100%. But given that the Defense has "fought the good fight" for the majority of the season, I'm gonna cut them some slack on a day where once again the offense simply can't get their **** together.

I swear the Defense must sit on the sidelines (in the 97 seconds our "three and out" offense affords them) and wonder, "If the offense won't give 100%, why should we?"

A great Defense would have beaten the Raiders on their own. This Defense is not great. But Nolan has done faaaaaaaaaar more with the D than McDaniels has with the O.

again, mcdaniels has way more to do with teh defense than you understand. to take all credit away from him and try to hand it all to nolan simply because you hate mcd is ridiculous.

Cito Pelon
12-21-2009, 05:42 PM
This. Once again, we are settling for field goals FAR too often. 4 FGs, and only 1 TD......just bad.

That pretty much sums it up. The team knows it, now it's a matter of correcting that issue or fade out.

Mediator12
12-21-2009, 06:30 PM
I agree with you 100%. But given that the Defense has "fought the good fight" for the majority of the season, I'm gonna cut them some slack on a day where once again the offense simply can't get their **** together.

I swear the Defense must sit on the sidelines (in the 97 seconds our "three and out" offense affords them) and wonder, "If the offense won't give 100%, why should we?"

A great Defense would have beaten the Raiders on their own. This Defense is not great. But Nolan has done faaaaaaaaaar more with the D than McDaniels has with the O.

I just can not buy this type of Argument. The defense should not get a "pass" for an epic Failure down the stretch. Yes, they had been excellent at doing this for a good part of the season, but to fail against the Raiders at home with a playoff berth on the line is still a complete failure. You grade performance game by game, and the defense did not pass this game. They may still pass for the season, but that grade is only partially done.

Here is what we know about the defense yesterday:

1. That team should not have gotten 9 points let alone 20.
2. They allowed 4 points more than average against a horrible one dimensional offense that did not get one Turnover to help with the score.
3. Instead, they allowed the Raiders to keep the field position static, let them chew up clock, and gave up a long game winning TD drive to win the game.
4. They surrendered 241 rushing yards on 34 carries for a whopping 7.1 YPA.
5. They gave up 3 huge runs to Michael Bush, a complete non-factor in the NFL until this game, by blowing backside gap control.
6. They let one of the worst QB's in the league lead a 62 yard TD drive, that was actually 75 after the sack and allowed a second and 23 PI call to get a first down.

In short, the defense played great early, but failed late. They are the closer for this team and they failed to close the game with several chances to make plays on the final drive. They got gashed in the running game and could not stop the pass on the final drive. This is not like the former DEN defenses that always had to deal with short fields from ST's and turnovers either.

So, give them praise for being much better this year, they deserve it. However, if you let them off the hook for their atrocious non-performance yesterday, that is really doing them a disservice. They got their asses kicked yesterday and they need to look in the mirror, admit it, and don't do it again.

orinjkrush
12-21-2009, 06:40 PM
I just can not buy this type of Argument. The defense should not get a "pass" for an epic Failure down the stretch. Yes, they had been excellent at doing this for a good part of the season, but to fail against the Raiders at home with a playoff berth on the line is still a complete failure. You grade performance game by game, and the defense did not pass this game. They may still pass for the season, but that grade is only partially done.

Here is what we know about the defense yesterday:

1. That team should not have gotten 9 points let alone 20.
2. They allowed 4 points more than average against a horrible one dimensional offense that did not get one Turnover to help with the score.
3. Instead, they allowed the Raiders to keep the field position static, let them chew up clock, and gave up a long game winning TD drive to win the game.
4. They surrendered 241 rushing yards on 34 carries for a whopping 7.1 YPA.
5. They gave up 3 huge runs to Michael Bush, a complete non-factor in the NFL until this game, by blowing backside gap control.
6. They let one of the worst QB's in the league lead a 62 yard TD drive, that was actually 75 after the sack and allowed a second and 23 PI call to get a first down.

In short, the defense played great early, but failed late. They are the closer for this team and they failed to close the game with several chances to make plays on the final drive. They got gashed in the running game and could not stop the pass on the final drive. This is not like the former DEN defenses that always had to deal with short fields from ST's and turnovers either.

So, give them praise for being much better this year, they deserve it. However, if you let them off the hook for their atrocious non-performance yesterday, that is really doing them a disservice. They got their asses kicked yesterday and they need to look in the mirror, admit it, and don't do it again.

"they"? which players specifically? sounds like LB play to me. Not DL or DB. Who specifically? (Woodyard and ....?)

Mediator12
12-21-2009, 06:47 PM
"they"? which players specifically? sounds like LB play to me. Not DL or DB. Who specifically? (Woodyard and ....?)

It was everyone, and it started up front with the DL and LB's getting absolutely blown off the ball by backup level OL from the Raiders.

The secondary also blew some plays, played some poor techniques on the coverages they were beat, and made some awful situational penalties. The safeties got their asses kicked allowing 7 10+ yard rushing plays as well.

All in all, the whole defense got worked over. Including Champ, Dawkins, and Goodman all making costly errors that contributed to TD's.

The funny thing is, I think Nolan would have been better served blitzing that final 4th and ten and even in the red zone. However, the team was in position to make plays and it was the PLAYERS who lost that game. It was not the coaching. They were prepared for what the raiders did. Nothing took them off guard. It was simply very poor effort, execution, and focus that contributed to them playing so poorly.

~Crash~
12-21-2009, 08:44 PM
how on God's green earth do you NOT BLITZ jabba-marcus on that last drive?

When jabba is QB you send everyone!


That is all.

What you did not like that send 10 men to stand on the line of scrimage looking around like dip ****s play?

CEH
12-21-2009, 11:19 PM
I just can not buy this type of Argument. The defense should not get a "pass" for an epic Failure down the stretch. Yes, they had been excellent at doing this for a good part of the season, but to fail against the Raiders at home with a playoff berth on the line is still a complete failure. You grade performance game by game, and the defense did not pass this game. They may still pass for the season, but that grade is only partially done.

Here is what we know about the defense yesterday:

1. That team should not have gotten 9 points let alone 20.
2. They allowed 4 points more than average against a horrible one dimensional offense that did not get one Turnover to help with the score.
3. Instead, they allowed the Raiders to keep the field position static, let them chew up clock, and gave up a long game winning TD drive to win the game.
4. They surrendered 241 rushing yards on 34 carries for a whopping 7.1 YPA.
5. They gave up 3 huge runs to Michael Bush, a complete non-factor in the NFL until this game, by blowing backside gap control.
6. They let one of the worst QB's in the league lead a 62 yard TD drive, that was actually 75 after the sack and allowed a second and 23 PI call to get a first down.

In short, the defense played great early, but failed late. They are the closer for this team and they failed to close the game with several chances to make plays on the final drive. They got gashed in the running game and could not stop the pass on the final drive. This is not like the former DEN defenses that always had to deal with short fields from ST's and turnovers either.

So, give them praise for being much better this year, they deserve it. However, if you let them off the hook for their atrocious non-performance yesterday, that is really doing them a disservice. They got their asses kicked yesterday and they need to look in the mirror, admit it, and don't do it again.


I'm not saying the defense was stellar but they made enough plays to win thi s game. The Defense allowed 140 of those 240 yards on 5 carries. 26 on a great naked boot by Frye. Those 140 totaled a whooping 7 points. Now they allowed 100 on 29 other carries for 6 points and on one of those FG helped out by a Doom 15 yard PI and the leg of Jano from 54

Again 1st and goal at the two playoffs on the line. TD and we are off to the playoffs. Then to add insult to injury they got the ball back for the offense with 4 minutes to go ahead by 6. Instead of churning out a couple first downs to win the game they used 15 seconds and lost 9 yards

How about a Mitch Berger punt from the Raiders 41 for 7 yards. Epic fail there and Oak turned that momemtum swing into 7 points.

Of course they failed to win it late for Denver but in my view it was 70/30 offense to defense. Plus without the defensive turnovers I doubt Denver's O get to 10 points.

fontaine
12-22-2009, 03:27 AM
Any team that gives up 200+ rushing yards against a team that has had ZERO success throwing the ball all game, needs to be examined. The "D" does not get a pass here because they have been pretty good all year. Yes, they get kudos for having DEN in an excellent position to make the playoffs with some stellar play.

However, the front seven is getting their asses kicked, Again, down the stretch of games and the year. This is what happens when the Front seven is predicated on smoke and mirrors and not talent. That the Raiders pushed both of DEN's lines around yesterday is absolutely unexcusable.

So, While the Offense also screwed up the Win by not scoring, AGAIN, the defense shares all kinds of culpability for not stopping the worst Passing offense down the stretch by being passive, tentative, and loose. This is the kind of thing they have done all year to secure a Broncos victory. To be so bad versus the Raiders when it counted most is flat out terrible. No, excuses for that. None. They had a chance to win it for DEN and simply failed.

Who in the front seven was getting his ass kicked? I saw Davis and Ayers get handled a few times, and they took advantage of our wide pass rush by running delayed runs or draws inside the LT but not really anyone getting their asses kicked.

We had Frye CONSTANTLY being forced to scramble to his right because the pocket was being collapses, I saw Fields be very active and Davis show up. Ayers and DJ had a quiet game, but apart from two drives that accounted for MOST of that rushing total, I saw the front 7 control the game.

bpc
12-22-2009, 03:52 AM
We definitely need some playmakers on the front line of this defense. Our unit right now is populated by a bunch of regular guys. There are no special players. We have some transitional 3-4 backups which we picked up in the offseason. We have some out of place 4-3 DE's/DT's playing significant minutes in a defense that doesn't fit their skills. R. Fields played really well in the first 6 games but over the last 8, he has been no where to be found when the games on the line. He's a nice backup player, shouldn't really be a starter. Same with L. Smith, McBean, and probably Peterson. All very nice substitutes and spot starters but none of these guys were are actively have been difference makers at any point of their careers. Marcus Thomas isn't even a 3-4 guy but he's forced to play serious minutes.

Denver has a lot of work to do between years 2-3 in terms of getting some impact players in their front 7. There's a lot of work to still be done as this last weekend showed us.

Personally, i would LOVE to get a chance to add a guy like Gerald McCoy or Derrick Morgan this offseason. Both are dynamic playmakers that could significantly upgrade positions where they would step in.

Mediator12
12-22-2009, 09:49 AM
I'm not saying the defense was stellar but they made enough plays to win thi s game. The Defense allowed 140 of those 240 yards on 5 carries. 26 on a great naked boot by Frye. Those 140 totaled a whooping 7 points. Now they allowed 100 on 29 other carries for 6 points and on one of those FG helped out by a Doom 15 yard PI and the leg of Jano from 54

Again 1st and goal at the two playoffs on the line. TD and we are off to the playoffs. Then to add insult to injury they got the ball back for the offense with 4 minutes to go ahead by 6. Instead of churning out a couple first downs to win the game they used 15 seconds and lost 9 yards

How about a Mitch Berger punt from the Raiders 41 for 7 yards. Epic fail there and Oak turned that momemtum swing into 7 points.

Of course they failed to win it late for Denver but in my view it was 70/30 offense to defense. Plus without the defensive turnovers I doubt Denver's O get to 10 points.

Actually, they totally failed to make the plays to win the game. That is what I am saying. The Frye Naked Boot was completely blown by Goodman who had contain. Dawkins and Bruton got suckered 4-5 times on the backside cutback runs including the Michael Bush untouched 23 yard TD. The long Runs took time off the clock and allowed the defense for OAK to rest and adjust even though they did come up empty on the goalline.

On the final drive the defense made a bunch of errors:

1. They had OAK at 2cd and 23 and somehow failed to cover Deep resulting in a PI first down on the final drive.
2. They had OAK in fourth and 10 and ran the worst playcall ever allowing the middle of the field to be completely open.
3. The gave up another penalty in the Red Zone that made it 1st and goal from the five with the clock stopped, instead of 3rd and goal from the 6 with the clock running at 30 seconds.
4. They ran a man under scheme from the five and did not run the right technique to switch on the pick from the TE to cover the slot inside. That led to the easy TD for Schilens.

Now, Did the offense struggle mightily again? Absolutely. They have severely regressed up front down the stretch and have failed to run the ball in the games they have lost. They just look apathetic in their execution instead of passionate about it. Both units need to play harder to win the final 2 games and ensure a playoff spot.

go_broncos
12-22-2009, 10:02 AM
Actually, they totally failed to make the plays to win the game. That is what I am saying. The Frye Naked Boot was completely blown by Goodman who had contain. Dawkins and Bruton got suckered 4-5 times on the backside cutback runs including the Michael Bush untouched 23 yard TD. The long Runs took time off the clock and allowed the defense for OAK to rest and adjust even though they did come up empty on the goalline.

On the final drive the defense made a bunch of errors:

1. They had OAK at 2cd and 23 and somehow failed to cover Deep resulting in a PI first down on the final drive.
2. They had OAK in fourth and 10 and ran the worst playcall ever allowing the middle of the field to be completely open.
3. The gave up another penalty in the Red Zone that made it 1st and goal from the five with the clock stopped, instead of 3rd and goal from the 6 with the clock running at 30 seconds.
4. They ran a man under scheme from the five and did not run the right technique to switch on the pick from the TE to cover the slot inside. That led to the easy TD for Schilens.

Now, Did the offense struggle mightily again? Absolutely. They have severely regressed up front down the stretch and have failed to run the ball in the games they have lost. They just look apathetic in their execution instead of passionate about it. Both units need to play harder to win the final 2 games and ensure a playoff spot.

Please don't remind me last week's game..I still can't believe that we lost to JaMarcus Russell.
The only games he seems to play well is against Denver.

Mediator12
12-22-2009, 10:08 AM
Who in the front seven was getting his ass kicked? I saw Davis and Ayers get handled a few times, and they took advantage of our wide pass rush by running delayed runs or draws inside the LT but not really anyone getting their asses kicked.

We had Frye CONSTANTLY being forced to scramble to his right because the pocket was being collapses, I saw Fields be very active and Davis show up. Ayers and DJ had a quiet game, but apart from two drives that accounted for MOST of that rushing total, I saw the front 7 control the game.

All the DL was getting their ass kicked in the running game, and the LB's were overpursuing the play on almost all the long runs. The DL was getting blown off the ball in the second half, but the aggressive LB play made up for it on several plays that did not include counters or cutbacks. Their OL was not very good in pass protection, but they were manhandling the DL in the running game for the most part. In short, the Front seven was very good against the pass, but terrible against the run.

The reason it looked like they were controlling the run was that pursuit was very aggressive to the shown playside. OAK got very little straight up against the Front seven, but the backside cutbacks and designed counters exposed their aggressiveness to the tune of 7 10+ yard runs for 130 yards. So, in order to play the run so well they had to forsake backside gap discipline and it cost them dearly. It could have been worse, but they made a valiant Goalline stand to keep them from getting points.

However, it also gave the Raiders a look at their Goalline package and how DEN was going to play them that game. That look helped them to call the rub route that allowed Shilens to score later on that final drive.

Traveler
12-22-2009, 10:16 AM
IRRC, there was an article this offseason that studied the play of big physical vs small finesse offensive and defensive line play at the beginning and toward the end of the season. Wish I could remember where I found it.

In short, the article stated that small OL & DL's- like ours- usually get worn down by mid-season and severely struggle towards seasons end. Whereas, bigger more physical teams struggle early and get better towards the end of the year. As we all know, smaller linemen have been a Bronco staple for almost a decade.

The Baltimore game exposed the major weakness on both our offense and defensive lines. Weakness that won't be corrected until we get the type of players in here that can physically beat the man in front of them one on one.

Without re-watching the game, Oakland has similar types of players on defense as Baltimore and a used a similar gameplan against us. We were flat out hammered physically on both sides of the ball.

Look for this to continue at Philly on Sunday because Denver hasn't shown physically they are capable of stopping a team like that.

Mediator12
12-22-2009, 10:26 AM
IRRC, there was an article this offseason that studied the play of big physical vs small finesse offensive and defensive line play at the beginning and toward the end of the season. Wish I could remember where I found it.

In short, the article stated that small OL & DL's- like ours- usually get worn down by mid-season and severely struggle towards seasons end. Whereas, bigger more physical teams struggle early and get better towards the end of the year. As we all know, smaller linemen have been a Bronco staple for almost a decade.

The Baltimore game exposed the major weakness on both our offense and defensive lines. Weakness that won't be corrected until we get the type of players in here that can physically beat the man in front of them one on one.

Without re-watching the game, Oakland has similar types of players on defense as Baltimore and a used a similar gameplan against us. We were flat out hammered physically on both sides of the ball.

Look for this to continue at Philly on Sunday because Denver hasn't shown physically they are capable of stopping a team like that it.

That is a very good point Traveler. PHI is very Physical on their Lines and they play a very aggressive Front to boot. What really concerns me is if DEN's pass rush gets stonewalled against PHI's monster OL. SF has a much bigger 3-4 group and they really struggled to get consistent pressure on McNabb last week. They limited PHI's Explosive plays, but they still struggled to stop the passing offense or the running game without Westbrook.

What is important at the end of the season is not necessarily size, but the ability to beat the player across from you consistently. That is what really matters down the stretch. The schemes are pretty played out, and it comes down to players making plays when they are there. Everyone knows what you do, how you do it, your tendencies, and how you try and create mismatches. They know your strengths and weaknesses and you know theirs. It simply comes down to winning the playmaking battles.

fontaine
01-04-2010, 02:26 PM
All the DL was getting their ass kicked in the running game, and the LB's were overpursuing the play on almost all the long runs. The DL was getting blown off the ball in the second half, but the aggressive LB play made up for it on several plays that did not include counters or cutbacks. Their OL was not very good in pass protection, but they were manhandling the DL in the running game for the most part. In short, the Front seven was very good against the pass, but terrible against the run.

The reason it looked like they were controlling the run was that pursuit was very aggressive to the shown playside. OAK got very little straight up against the Front seven, but the backside cutbacks and designed counters exposed their aggressiveness to the tune of 7 10+ yard runs for 130 yards. So, in order to play the run so well they had to forsake backside gap discipline and it cost them dearly. It could have been worse, but they made a valiant Goalline stand to keep them from getting points.

However, it also gave the Raiders a look at their Goalline package and how DEN was going to play them that game. That look helped them to call the rub route that allowed Shilens to score later on that final drive.

Thanks for the clarification (only read your response now). And yes, I agree that against the pass the front 7 was very active, but not against the run which is why I asked for the clarification.