The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community

The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/index.php)
-   Orange Mane Central Discussion (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   O-line rankings (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=115614)

TonyR 06-03-2014 10:48 AM

O-line rankings
 
I have a feeling this will be controversial here, but Mike Tanier doesn't have the Broncos' O-line in the top 5.

Quote:

Denver Broncos. Anytime you rate a Peyton Manning offensive line, you must remember that it is a Peyton Manning offensive line. No quarterback in NFL history, not even Dan Marino, has done more to make his lines look better, from solving problems with pre-snap audibles to releasing the ball quickly to using the space within the pocket the way Rembrandt used a canvas.

So the Broncos line looks great on the stat spreadsheets, and Ryan Clady's return from a foot injury gives them a Pro Bowl boost at the most important position. But reasons for skepticism knock the Broncos out of the top five: They lost Zane Beadles, and they are sliding several linemen into new positions to accommodate Clady's return and Beadles' departure. Plus, memories of the Super Bowl are still pretty fresh. The personnel is solid enough, but if the Broncos ever need their line to elevate Peyton Manning -- as opposed to vice versa -- they may be in for another rude shock like the one they felt in February.
http://www.sportsonearth.com/article...-ravens#!T5STB

I want to argue against this, but anyone who hasn't erased the Super Bowl from their mind will have to admit there's some truth to it.

Krayzie8s 06-03-2014 11:01 AM

I'm hoping orlando will be better at left guard than zane, but I guess only time will tell.

UltimateHoboW/Shotgun 06-03-2014 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyR (Post 4121253)
I have a feeling this will be controversial here, but Mike Tanier doesn't have the Broncos' O-line in the top 5.


http://www.sportsonearth.com/article...-ravens#!T5STB

I want to argue against this, but anyone who hasn't erased the Super Bowl from their mind will have to admit there's some truth to it.

I think that is true of any O-line that has a 5 QB as their QB. A great QB will cure many ills.

gyldenlove 06-03-2014 11:11 AM

I don't see it. Clady is one of the top 3 LTs and Vasquez is one of the top 3 OGs in the league. I think the remaining 3 positions are average at best right now, but I think that is still enough to put the line in the top 5.

NorCalBronco7 06-03-2014 11:12 AM

The writer makes it sound like Beadles leaving is this big deal. I sure as hell dont think it is. And yeah, Seattle beat the crap out of the Broncos line, but that was the best defense in the NFL and they were deep. That was the only bad game the oline had all year as a whole. I have no doubt those guys are top 5 when healthy.

randerson1184 06-03-2014 11:16 AM

Saints at #3? Cowboys at #1?

9ers aren't in top 5?

Yeah, I'm not at all in agreement. NO's line had some substantial issues in pass protection and run blocking last year. The 9ers have one of the best lines in football, IMO.

Drunken.Broncoholic2 06-03-2014 11:27 AM

We watched 2 starters go down before even week 2. They responded by protecting manning as the least sacked QB in the league for the year. Some of that is Mannings style, but I find it hard to believe he's the only reason for that low number. They got rid of a weak link IMO and gained back an all pro. Don't see how they are in such bad shape.

BroncoMan4ever 06-03-2014 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyR (Post 4121253)
I have a feeling this will be controversial here, but Mike Tanier doesn't have the Broncos' O-line in the top 5.


http://www.sportsonearth.com/article...-ravens#!T5STB

I want to argue against this, but anyone who hasn't erased the Super Bowl from their mind will have to admit there's some truth to it.

Individually we have a top 5 LT(when healthy) and Top 5 RG. However, LG is a question mark right now and Beadles while he did get a pro bowl nod is not that great. C has been nothing special. RT is a big question mark going into the season. So while I think we will have a really good OL once the season begins, I am not surprised that the line isn't ranked that highly right now.

TonyR 06-03-2014 12:52 PM

^ I agree on all counts, BMan.

Tombstone RJ 06-03-2014 01:14 PM

Broncos oline is easily top 5... anyone who ranks the pokes oline as #1 has got to be on acid. The article penalizes the Broncos for having a HoF QB that "makes them better" but ignores this same crutch for the patriots? I'll take the Broncos oline over the pats any day of the week. Brady was sacked more than any other time since 2001 and the article excuses this by proclaiming "injuries" and yet, again, the Broncos don't get the same respect even though Clady and the Broncos centers were gone/injured/replaced and the Broncos shuffled around players. He then says "depth" is what makes the pats oline so good, yet he doesn't see this with the Broncos oline?

Tombstone RJ 06-03-2014 01:43 PM

Is Franklin or Painter moving to guard?

Kaylore 06-03-2014 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ (Post 4121371)
Is Franklin or Painter moving to guard?

Yes.

TonyR 06-03-2014 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ (Post 4121366)
Broncos oline is easily top 5... anyone who ranks the pokes oline as #1 has got to be on acid. The article penalizes the Broncos for having a HoF QB that "makes them better" but ignores this same crutch for the patriots? I'll take the Broncos oline over the pats any day of the week. Brady was sacked more than any other time since 2001 and the article excuses this by proclaiming "injuries" and yet, again, the Broncos don't get the same respect even though Clady and the Broncos centers were gone/injured/replaced and the Broncos shuffled around players. He then says "depth" is what makes the pats oline so good, yet he doesn't see this with the Broncos oline?

I don't necessarily disagree with your point, but want to throw out some numbers suggesting how good PM is at not getting sacked.

His last year in Indy, 2010, he was sacked 16 times. The next year, without Manning, Indy QB's were sacked 35 times. For the mathematically challenged, that's more than double.

In 2011, the year before Manning was a Bronco, Denver QB's were sacked 42 times. Manning was sacked 21 times as a Bronco in 2012. So he cut the number in half.

So, even if you want to attribute some of those numbers to other factors, you have to admit Manning makes a huge difference to an O-line statistically.

Drunken.Broncoholic2 06-03-2014 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyR (Post 4121483)
I don't necessarily disagree with your point, but want to throw out some numbers suggesting how good PM is at not getting sacked.

His last year in Indy, 2010, he was sacked 16 times. The next year, without Manning, Indy QB's were sacked 35 times. For the mathematically challenged, that's more than double.

In 2011, the year before Manning was a Bronco, Denver QB's were sacked 42 times. Manning was sacked 21 times as a Bronco in 2012. So he cut the number in half.

So, even if you want to attribute some of those numbers to other factors, you have to admit Manning makes a huge difference to an O-line statistically.

I think some horrendous QBs inflated those sack numbers. I think if a good QB was playing for us,not a HOF like manning, we would still have low sackl numbers with our Oline, maybe not the lowest in the league like manning, but toward the top of the league in not giving up sacks.

TonyR 06-03-2014 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drunken.Broncoholic2 (Post 4121488)
I think some horrendous QBs inflated those sack numbers. I think if a good QB was playing for us,not a HOF like manning, we would still have low sackl numbers with our Oline, maybe not the lowest in the league like manning, but toward the top of the league in not giving up sacks.

"Horrendous QBs" were probably a factor, yes. But in 2012 Luck got sacked 41 times in Indy, and he's far from "horrendous". So Indy's numbers went from 21 with Manning, to 42 and 41 the two years after he left.

randerson1184 06-03-2014 08:54 PM

I think part of what attracted Manning to Denver was the fact that we have one of the best offensive lines in football. Our line is better than Tennessee's or Miami's.

Powderaddict 06-03-2014 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyR (Post 4121495)
"Horrendous QBs" were probably a factor, yes. But in 2012 Luck got sacked 41 times in Indy, and he's far from "horrendous". So Indy's numbers went from 21 with Manning, to 42 and 41 the two years after he left.

Were they the same 5 guys in 2012 as in 2010?

I honestly don't know.

Drunken.Broncoholic2 06-03-2014 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyR (Post 4121495)
"Horrendous QBs" were probably a factor, yes. But in 2012 Luck got sacked 41 times in Indy, and he's far from "horrendous". So Indy's numbers went from 21 with Manning, to 42 and 41 the two years after he left.

From what I remember there were only 2 Olineman that carried over.

That 2010 Oline was far different than 2012. Different even in 2011. Different player mean different results.

strafen 06-03-2014 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyR (Post 4121253)
I have a feeling this will be controversial here, but Mike Tanier doesn't have the Broncos' O-line in the top 5.


http://www.sportsonearth.com/article...-ravens#!T5STB

I want to argue against this, but anyone who hasn't erased the Super Bowl from their mind will have to admit there's some truth to it.

It's true. I don't see ourselves as being top-5. We've got players shuffled around the interior line and RT, so we really won't know what kind of OL we've got until they become a cohesive unit, probably 6 weeks into the season...

Bronc0guy 06-03-2014 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Powderaddict (Post 4121586)
Were they the same 5 guys in 2012 as in 2010?

I honestly don't know.

Idk either. Probably not, but I bet it was pretty damn close.

mennonite 06-03-2014 10:02 PM

Wasn't the Colts O line fairly unimpressive after Tarik Glenn retired? It's been a while and i can't remember.

Drunken.Broncoholic2 06-03-2014 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bronc0guy (Post 4121595)
Idk either. Probably not, but I bet it was pretty damn close.

From what I've seen in 2010 it was OT Johnson LG richard
C Saturday RG devan OT Diem. 2012 it was LT costanzo LG Linkenbach C satale RG Mcglynn RT Justice.

ZONA 06-03-2014 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drunken.Broncoholic2 (Post 4121293)
We watched 2 starters go down before even week 2. They responded by protecting manning as the least sacked QB in the league for the year. Some of that is Mannings style, but I find it hard to believe he's the only reason for that low number. They got rid of a weak link IMO and gained back an all pro. Don't see how they are in such bad shape.

I beg to differ. We had 4 starters out before week 3. If you remember, Walton was scheduled as the starting center. He couldn't get healthy so they signed Koppen again, to start, he then got hurt even before the season starter. So we were essentially on our 3rd starting center before week 1. Then yes, we lost Clady, now making it 4.

Kaylore 06-03-2014 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZONA (Post 4121603)
I beg to differ. We had 4 starters out before week 3. If you remember, Walton was scheduled as the starting center. He couldn't get healthy so they signed Koppen again, to start, he then got hurt even before the season starter. So we were essentially on our 3rd starting center before week 1. Then yes, we lost Clady, now making it 4.

Eh, I'm not certain Walton was seriously going to start for us last season.

Drunken.Broncoholic2 06-04-2014 07:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZONA (Post 4121603)
I beg to differ. We had 4 starters out before week 3. If you remember, Walton was scheduled as the starting center. He couldn't get healthy so they signed Koppen again, to start, he then got hurt even before the season starter. So we were essentially on our 3rd starting center before week 1. Then yes, we lost Clady, now making it 4.

Ok assuming Koppen was the starter after Walton, that would mean clady Walton Koppen. Who's the 4th starter to go down?


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:09 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.