diversify in Broncos' offense article - The Orange Mane

elsid13 · 10-28-2006, 11:30 AM

Plummer deserves a chance to diversify in Broncos' offense
By Milo F. Bryant
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercu...s/15858560.htm
The Gazette

(MCT)

ENGLEWOOD, Colo. - Take a long look at what Jake Plummer has to work with before further crucifying him.

Offenses fail because of the quarterback. They succeed because of the quarterback. That's what we're supposed to think - at least in the debate over who stole the mojo Plummer created last season.

Rightly or wrongly, Plummer, because he is the quarterback, takes the brunt of the criticism when the Denver Broncos' offense is as uninspiring as melting snow. It's prompted a debate about whether rookie Jay Cutler should play.

A lot of that Plummer criticism has come from this column. And, a lot of that criticism has been because of the way Plummer plays within the Broncos' offensive scheme.

There isn't a sign above Plummer's locker that reads, "Mediocrity Lives Here." But there should be.

This season, Broncos loyalists have not seen any of last year's stuff. Absent are the bits and pieces of the Broncos' offense that led to a 13-3 regular season record and a trip to the AFC Championship Game. The faithful have seen a struggling and an often-confused quarterback.

They've seen a coach in Coach Mike Shanahan too often seems scared or unwilling to let his quarterback lead the offense.

Shanahan's support for Plummer has been so mild that the situation is eerily similar to the fallout after Shannon Sharpe ripped Plummer a couple of years ago. Folks around Broncosland said it was just the outspoken Sharpe being Sharpe. But nobody refuted Sharpe's claims.

No support then. No support now.

But few should expect fervent support of Plummer from Shanahan though the media.

However, the lack of on-field support is peculiar, meaning what happened to the play-calling and nuances of the offense that made the Broncos successful last season?

Shanahan is an excellent offensive coach. Disputing that is unwise. But it's Shanahan's offensive intellect that should have people wondering why he hasn't returned to his offensive roots.

This offense is methodical, but it's supposed to be quick striking, too. Plays rarely take long to develop. There aren't too many five- and seven-step drops for the quarterback.

Steve Young and Joe Montana are in the Pro Football Hall of Fame because of the quick passing game, commonly referred to as "the West Coast Offense."

Young gets the snap, drops back three steps and hits wide receiver Jerry Rice on an inside slant.

The next play, Young takes the snap, doesn't take a step, and hits tight end Brent Jones on an out pattern.

Then Young takes that rare five- to seven-step drop and connects with running back Ricky Watters on a swing pass.

Boom. Boom. Boom.

That's how the offense is supposed to work.

We saw that passing game in Denver last season.

We're not seeing it now. And we're not seeing Plummer changing the plays at the line of scrimmage very often, which means the play calls are still coming from Shanahan.

I called last year's effort a "dumbing down" of the offense, making a sometimes-complex scheme simple enough for Plummer to excel. I should have called it "getting back to the basics."

Plummer said Wednesday that teams weren't playing the Broncos' passing game any differently. He said that opponents teams were not always concentrating on trying to take away the short passing game.

"That's just a flow-of-the-game type of call," Plummer said. "When (the play) comes in from the sideline, the coaches are seeing them playing soft and giving us the easy completion."

The Broncos don't seem to want to take that easy completion.

The Broncos' tight ends have seven catches though six games - all Broncos tight ends. In the victorious Super Bowl years, the Broncos' tight ends finished with 86 and 71 receptions. The Broncos don't have Sharpe catching those passes, but they can do better than 1.1 catches per game.

And where is the fullback out of the backfield? The Broncos have done a decent job of passing to running back Tatum Bell, who could have more than his 13 receptions. But passing to the fullback has almost been nonexistent.

None of this means the Broncos fail to have good athletes in those positions. The Broncos simply aren't using those positions the way this offense was meant to use them.

Tight ends are an integral aspect of this offense.

Fullbacks create enough of a wrinkle to make linebackers blink. They both help move the ball.

Let us see what Plummer can do when the plays are called and the personnel is used the right way - the way it was all used last season.

Plummer deserves that opportunity

GonzoLays · 10-28-2006, 11:43 AM

I don't know, maybe Scheffler stinks. It is not outside the realm of possibilities that he could be a bust. We all know Alexander is a terrible pass receiving tight end.

OR! Shanahan intentionally kept the offense vanilla because he knew he could beat the first six teams playing that way. You play to win the game per se.

St. Louis -- They blindsided us. Don't know if we ran a full offense in that game with all the new guys.
KC -- definitely played that game safe
NE -- Opened up a little more against a good team
Bal -- didn't show much
Oakland -- bland as can be
Cleveland -- an uncharacteristic offense, a bunch of pass plays. Maybe we were giving Indy something to think about.

This is game we open the playbook and start clicking. Watch the TE's be a major factor in this game. Hopefully

You know what they say, great defenses always beats great offenses.

Denver 20, Indy 13

pootz22 · 10-28-2006, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GonzoLays

I don't know, maybe Scheffler stinks. It is not outside the realm of possibilities that he could be a bust. We all know Alexander is a terrible pass receiving tight end.

OR! Shanahan intentionally kept the offense vanilla because he knew he could beat the first six teams playing that way. You play to win the game per se.

St. Louis -- They blindsided us. Don't know if we ran a full offense in that game with all the new guys.
KC -- definitely played that game safe
NE -- Opened up a little more against a good team
Bal -- didn't show much
Oakland -- bland as can be
Cleveland -- an uncharacteristic offense, a bunch of pass plays. Maybe we were giving Indy something to think about.

This is game we open the playbook and start clicking. Watch the TE's be a major factor in this game. Hopefully

You know what they say, great defenses always beats great offenses.

Denver 20, Indy 13

ludo21 · 10-28-2006, 11:56 AM

Thats actually a good breakdown of the first 6 games there Gonzo. I know that if we wanna win vs the Colts, we gotta open up things and put some points n the board.

We have scored just enough to win, and Jake has made enough plays to win us 5 games, it is strange, but history tells us that this wont last long.

freak6 · 10-28-2006, 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GonzoLays

I don't know, maybe Scheffler stinks. It is not outside the realm of possibilities that he could be a bust. We all know Alexander is a terrible pass receiving tight end.

OR! Shanahan intentionally kept the offense vanilla because he knew he could beat the first six teams playing that way. You play to win the game per se.

St. Louis -- They blindsided us. Don't know if we ran a full offense in that game with all the new guys.
KC -- definitely played that game safe
NE -- Opened up a little more against a good team
Bal -- didn't show much
Oakland -- bland as can be
Cleveland -- an uncharacteristic offense, a bunch of pass plays. Maybe we were giving Indy something to think about.

This is game we open the playbook and start clicking. Watch the TE's be a major factor in this game. Hopefully

You know what they say, great defenses always beats great offenses.

Denver 20, Indy 13

I think you are overanalyzing Gonzo.

StL - Jake played the worst game of his Denver career, 3 bad ints. One gives up a gimme FG, the other 2 take crucial points off the board, we lose. On one, he misses a wide open WR set up by a perfect bootleg, our bread and butter play.

KC - In reaction to Jake's play, we keep it safe, he still throws an inexplicable int that led directly to half of the Chiefs points that day. Another redzone turnover forced by the D.

NE - the offense clicked, and Javon made a fantastic move on what should have been at 18 yard gain, turned into an 83 yard TD. Javon also made a great snare on another well thrown ball by Jake for a TD.

Bal - Jake again throws an early int reminiscent of a JV quarterback to Rolle over Javon, who had no chance to make the catch, it was pretty much identical to the pass that Javon caught to set up the W vs the Chiefs, but inconsistent Jake the Mistake blows it big time here. He makes some good passes in the 4th to help seal the game. Champ saves the day to end the 1st half. On a bootleg, a wide open Rod Smith is forced to play DB and come back to break up an int.

Oakland - we jump on them, early, Sapp blows a TD catch, the D forces to more turnovers to stop Oakland scoring chances, and we get the W. Jake does get half his passing yards on a perfect bootleg, he leads Javon short who ran a corner post to set up a touchdown.

Cleveland - Jake has yet another inconsistent game, leaving more doubt in the mind of the coaches, the fans, and his players. Browns drop 2 possible ints. We sneak out with the W. Defense is pissed about yet another turnover giving up free points.

Based upon that, I don't buy into the fact that Mike is hiding plays to shock the NFL from here on out with our "real" offense. Mike Shanahan doesn't take any game for granted, if he had confidence to blow out these scrub teams, he would. He has no faith in Jake, and that was probably reiterated to his offensive coordinator after last weeks terrible outting vs the Browns.

Popps · 10-28-2006, 12:15 PM

I'm sure this article is going to get ripped to shreds. It's interesting and looks a little deeper into the problem than most.

That's how the offense is supposed to work.

We saw that passing game in Denver last season.

We're not seeing it now. And we're not seeing Plummer changing the plays at the line of scrimmage very often, which means the play calls are still coming from Shanahan.

I think that's what people who are looking at this from a fairly neutral perspective are saying.

How is it that Plummer was highly effective for three years, at least from a numbers perspective... and then now looks so stagnant.

I just watched the Browns tape again. Now, given.. he just made some stupid throws, without question. But, there were (again) a lot of plays where you're watching him go through reads and not having anyone to throw to. People get angry at him for locking on Rod or Javon, but what would YOU do if you were a QB? I know I'd be throwing to those two before Sheffler, if things weren't going well.

Jake has always made a few boneheaded throws per game. But, he's also always sparked enough offense to put up good numbers and justify sticking with him. So, what... did he just forget how to play after three years in our system?

To me, you've got two choices...

1. We have a new O.C. Teams almost always struggle for a while under a new coordinator and Jake was groomed by Kubiak, and is struggling without him.

2. Jake is afraid of Jay. As silly as that sounds, who knows... maybe it's true. I always took Jake as the type that would be fired up by the competition. But, maybe he was more comfortable knowing he had the support of the staff? Some QBs probably function better knowing that they are "the man," while some might need a back-up to push them.

Or, here's the least popular choice in the internet world..... maybe it's a little of both? Maybe it's not a black/white issue? (Gasp!)

Anyway, I'll guarantee you this much... this will be settled in two weeks. We're playing our two toughest games in a row coming up. Jake keeps or loses his job over these next two weeks.

BroncoSoja · 10-28-2006, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ludo21

We have scored just enough to win, and Jake has made enough plays to win us 5 games, it is strange, but history tells us that this wont last long.

First of all I don't know how the the hell that you can say Plummer has played well enought to "WIN" us anything this year (with exception of the NE game)..

Next thing I would like to know is when in this "History" during Plummers time here that you keep talking about.. When have we started off playing this bad on offense for SIX (6) games and then all of a sudden jumped out of the rut?....

freak6 · 10-28-2006, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroncoSoja

Next thing I would like to know is when in this "History" during Plummers time here that you keep talking about.. When have we started off playing this bad on offense for SIX (6) games and then all of a sudden jumped out of the rut?....

Another Plummer homer reaching for excuses. Reality has set in, and they are now posting up erroneous myths to justify thier backing of the worst starting QB in the NFL.

ludo21 · 10-28-2006, 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroncoSoja

First of all I don't know how the the hell that you can say Plummer has played well enought to "WIN" us anything this year (with exception of the NE game)..

Next thing I would like to know is when in this "History" during Plummers time here that you keep talking about.. When have we started off playing this bad on offense for SIX (6) games and then all of a sudden jumped out of the rut?....

I guess your right about the history of Plummer, but, the history of this team during the Shanny era is that our Offense isnt in ruts usually, we are normally a good offensive team.

We have had more points than the opponents, so obviously we scoring just enough to win those games. Jake hasnt played all world at all, but he has got it done when it counted. Somebody made the throws to the WR's. 2nd half on the B more game, we won it with just enough plays, NE game the O clicked, Oak game we did a good job first half, then played like crap 2nd half. Point is, this Offense (jake included) has made just enough plays to win games for us, that was my point.

Cito Pelon · 10-28-2006, 08:13 PM

On Shanny's show tonite he broke down one of the long completions to Javon at Cleve. It was a "go" route, three WR's and a TE streaking straight down the field, Tatum heads through the line and according to Shanny has two options - go left or right of the LB after what looked like about a 5-8 yd deep pattern. All four streaking receivers are blanketed w/one on one coverage, Jake decides to toss it to Javon.

Now, meanwhile the entire middle of the field is wide, wide open. It was a shot from the upper deck, so I could see the whole field. So I have to ask, why is Tatum, a TE, somebody not expoiting that huge open spot?

My answer is Shanny doesn't give receivers leeway on their patterns. They have to run a route as planned no matter what the DB is doing. Other O's don't do that. Now, other teams you'll see the QB throw one way, and the WR goes the other way. They didn't read the D the same way. Denver, I rarely see that. On the other hand, with other O's, I'll see some big plays come out of a receiver seeing a huge open hole to run into, or just stop when he's in a hole. Mediator I believe pointed out to me some time ago that Rod will do that. Nevertheless, I still have to wonder what if Shanny loosens up a little bit and lets some receivers adjust their routes?

And, please, I don't want to hear Jake couldn't handle it. If the receivers are not getting open the way the O is run right now, maybe the O should change the philosophy a little bit, relax a little bit. As it is right now, many times Jake just doesn't have an open receiver to throw to. And, please, I don't want to hear Jake is inaccurate or misses open receivers constantly. Every Qb in the league is off-target 3-4 times out of every 10. I just wonder at times if Shanny is not so hard ass he insists on total control of every motion his O makes, and thereby costs some first downs/big plays.

Sassy · 10-28-2006, 08:18 PM

Quote:

My answer is Shanny doesn't give receivers leeway on their patterns. They have to run a route as planned no matter what the DB is doing...

I just wonder at times if Shanny is not so hard ass he insists on total control of every motion his O makes, and thereby costs some first downs/big plays.

Nah...couldn't be...Shanahan is God.

Jetmeck · 10-28-2006, 08:39 PM

You r nuts. Jake is inaccurate as I have ever seen a FIRST qb.

....What the hell you talking about, nobody told HIM to force the ball into double or triple coverage or overthrow it badly.

watermock · 10-28-2006, 08:44 PM

I'm not going thru this field of idiots.

Fact is he threw it up for grabs and Walker brought it down.

That's reality.

wow...you can nit pick from a sky view? Guess what...players play at ground level...that's what they DO.

The real question is why a TE wasn't sitting in the hole in the zone.

watermock · 10-28-2006, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jetmeck

You r nuts. Jake is inaccurate as I have ever seen a FIRST qb.

....What the hell you talking about, nobody told HIM to force the ball into double or triple coverage or overthrow it badly.

I saw at least 5 passes into coverage. One managed to hit the ground into triple coverage.

I don't know why we can't get a TE to find the empty zone...that isn't Jake's fault. Maybe because we need to pass protect, or he never looks to the TE anyway.

The longer we wait for Cutler the longer we waste a fine defense.

Kaylore · 10-28-2006, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Popps

I'm sure this article is going to get ripped to shreds. It's interesting and looks a little deeper into the problem than most.

Yeah it'll get ripped apart because it's stupid. Let me show you how "deep" this article is as I reduce it to two sentences:

I don't see the fullbacks or tight ends catching the ball. Since I don't see it, it's not happening, so let's do that again since Shanahan forgot about it.

Yeah, that's the problem. The entire Raiders game was Plummer throwing to running backs. And I guess it's Cecil Sapp's fault that Plummer likes to throw behind his receivers and hold onto the ball too long.

It's such a good example of someone who doesn't know what they are talking about trying to diagnose a problem and looking really stupid in the process.

"Well gawrsh, I saw Vince Young throw to a fullback and it worked. By golly, THAT'S the problem! I can't wait to tell Mike Shanahan that the magical panacea to the offense's woes is throwing to fullbacks! Once he finds out he's going to give me a medal! Shoot, I bet I could coach pro-football! Holy crap! Super Bowl forever!!!!!"

Atwater His Ass · 10-28-2006, 09:00 PM

As much as I would like to believe this whole idea that we are just holding our cards close to the vest, I just don't buy it. A playoff spot is not guarenteed and I think, sooner rather than later, we are going to have to start playing better on offense.

Kaylore · 10-28-2006, 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atwater His Ass

As much as I would like to believe this whole idea that we are just holding our cards close to the vest, I just don't buy it. A playoff spot is not guarenteed and I think, sooner rather than later, we are going to have to start playing better on offense.

If you talk to anyone in football they'll tell you it doesn't work that way. Also, even if they could do it that way, most would rather play well on offense all season.

Besides, when has Shanahan ever "run out of ideas" on offense? This whole idea that we're "saving the good stuff" is just silly.

Cito Pelon · 10-28-2006, 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jetmeck

You r nuts. Jake is inaccurate as I have ever seen a FIRST qb.

....What the hell you talking about, nobody told HIM to force the ball into double or triple coverage or overthrow it badly.

What? If your'e replying to my post, I said "All four streaking receivers are blanketed w/one on one coverage, Jake decides to toss it to Javon." And what is a "FIRST qb"? So let me ask you, is Jake the first QB you've seen try to force the ball into double or triple coverage? You think Jake has a corner on that?

Cito Pelon · 10-28-2006, 11:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atwater His Ass

As much as I would like to believe this whole idea that we are just holding our cards close to the vest, I just don't buy it. A playoff spot is not guarenteed and I think, sooner rather than later, we are going to have to start playing better on offense.

I've heard for years and years and years that Denver runs very few plays on O, but from dozens of different formations, thereby getting the mismatches they want. I think at times this O requires too much precision. Without precision, the passing O just doesn't click. When is the last time the O ran a trick play? Never is the answer. Ever seen a flea-flicker from Shanny? Never is the answer. A halfback toss? Never is the answer. Hell, the reverse and the screen were absent from the O repertoire for about 2 whole years, maybe that was Alex Gibbs, I don't know, but it's crazy to not run some misdirection plays every game, and it's crazy to not run some trick plays every season.

Killericon · 10-29-2006, 12:53 AM

Quote:

Folks around Broncosland said it was just the outspoken Sharpe being Sharpe. But nobody refuted Sharpe's claims.

The most telling line in that article.

Popps · 10-29-2006, 12:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaylore

Yeah it'll get ripped apart because it's stupid. Let me show you how "deep" this article is as I reduce it to two sentences:

I don't see the fullbacks or tight ends catching the ball. Since I don't see it, it's not happening, so let's do that again since Shanahan forgot about it.

Yeah, that's the problem. The entire Raiders game was Plummer throwing to running backs. And I guess it's Cecil Sapp's fault that Plummer likes to throw behind his receivers and hold onto the ball too long.

It's such a good example of someone who doesn't know what they are talking about trying to diagnose a problem and looking really stupid in the process.

"Well gawrsh, I saw Vince Young throw to a fullback and it worked. By golly, THAT'S the problem! I can't wait to tell Mike Shanahan that the magical panacea to the offense's woes is throwing to fullbacks! Once he finds out he's going to give me a medal! Shoot, I bet I could coach pro-football! Holy crap! Super Bowl forever!!!!!"

Right, so he breaks things down in detail... you point and call him names.
About what I expected.

Kaylore · 10-29-2006, 01:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Popps

Right, so he breaks things down in detail... you point and call him names.
About what I expected.

He didn't break anything down. He pretended to by describing things an offense should be and then he mentions some things he hasn't seen. That's not an analysis or a break down. That's a poor excuse for a paper that is based on nothing. No stats, no games, no numbers, nothing. Just "I feel it should be this way. Now I'll describe what Vince young does using onomatopoeia. Now I'll say the full back needs to get the ball more. We'll I think I made my case here."

You tell me what he broke down. The whole article teaches nothing, gives no specifics and backs nothing up.

Killericon · 10-29-2006, 01:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaylore

He didn't break anything down. He pretended to by describing things an offense should be and then he mentions some things he hasn't seen. That's not an analysis or a break down. That's a poor excuse for a paper that is based on nothing. No stats, no games, no numbers, nothing. Just "I feel it should be this way. Now I'll describe what Vince young does using onomatopoeia. Now I'll say the full back needs to get the ball more. We'll I think I made my case here."

You tell me what he broke down. The whole article teaches nothing, gives no specifics and backs nothing up.

STEVE Young.

Also, the red zone FB passing attack was prevalent last year, and it isn't this year. It's a valid point.

Kaylore · 10-29-2006, 01:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by killericon

STEVE Young.

Also, the red zone FB passing attack was prevalent last year, and it isn't this year. It's a valid point.

One of the most remedial things you are tought when making an argument is that you back it up. He doesn't provide numbers, nor does he point to the number of plays that the fullback has been used in the pass game this year versus last year. I've got some bad news for this guy and that's that they have been used but Jake has been staring down other receivers and wetting himself.

ClevelandBronco · 10-29-2006, 01:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freak6

Another Plummer homer reaching for excuses. Reality has set in, and they are now posting up erroneous myths to justify thier backing of the worst starting QB in the NFL.

On the one hand, you appear to know more about football than most folks here.

On the other hand, you're almost a perfect a-hole.

On the other hand, you present legitimate arguments that counter some of best posters on the Mane.

On the other hand, you're almost a perfect a-hole.

On the other hand, you point out the contortions some of us are having to perform in the name of supporting the team.

On the other hand, you're almost a perfect a-hole.

Hard to call it, really. Maybe it all boils down to the idea that you're a perfect a-hole who knows football.

On the other hand, maybe you're just a perfect a-hole.

10-28-2006, 11:30 AM	#1
elsid13 Lost In Space Bóg, Honor, Ojczyzna Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: DC Posts: 19,080	diversify in Broncos' offense article Plummer deserves a chance to diversify in Broncos' offense By Milo F. Bryant http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercu...s/15858560.htm The Gazette (MCT) ENGLEWOOD, Colo. - Take a long look at what Jake Plummer has to work with before further crucifying him. Offenses fail because of the quarterback. They succeed because of the quarterback. That's what we're supposed to think - at least in the debate over who stole the mojo Plummer created last season. Rightly or wrongly, Plummer, because he is the quarterback, takes the brunt of the criticism when the Denver Broncos' offense is as uninspiring as melting snow. It's prompted a debate about whether rookie Jay Cutler should play. A lot of that Plummer criticism has come from this column. And, a lot of that criticism has been because of the way Plummer plays within the Broncos' offensive scheme. There isn't a sign above Plummer's locker that reads, "Mediocrity Lives Here." But there should be. This season, Broncos loyalists have not seen any of last year's stuff. Absent are the bits and pieces of the Broncos' offense that led to a 13-3 regular season record and a trip to the AFC Championship Game. The faithful have seen a struggling and an often-confused quarterback. They've seen a coach in Coach Mike Shanahan too often seems scared or unwilling to let his quarterback lead the offense. Shanahan's support for Plummer has been so mild that the situation is eerily similar to the fallout after Shannon Sharpe ripped Plummer a couple of years ago. Folks around Broncosland said it was just the outspoken Sharpe being Sharpe. But nobody refuted Sharpe's claims. No support then. No support now. But few should expect fervent support of Plummer from Shanahan though the media. However, the lack of on-field support is peculiar, meaning what happened to the play-calling and nuances of the offense that made the Broncos successful last season? Shanahan is an excellent offensive coach. Disputing that is unwise. But it's Shanahan's offensive intellect that should have people wondering why he hasn't returned to his offensive roots. This offense is methodical, but it's supposed to be quick striking, too. Plays rarely take long to develop. There aren't too many five- and seven-step drops for the quarterback. Steve Young and Joe Montana are in the Pro Football Hall of Fame because of the quick passing game, commonly referred to as "the West Coast Offense." Young gets the snap, drops back three steps and hits wide receiver Jerry Rice on an inside slant. The next play, Young takes the snap, doesn't take a step, and hits tight end Brent Jones on an out pattern. Then Young takes that rare five- to seven-step drop and connects with running back Ricky Watters on a swing pass. Boom. Boom. Boom. That's how the offense is supposed to work. We saw that passing game in Denver last season. We're not seeing it now. And we're not seeing Plummer changing the plays at the line of scrimmage very often, which means the play calls are still coming from Shanahan. I called last year's effort a "dumbing down" of the offense, making a sometimes-complex scheme simple enough for Plummer to excel. I should have called it "getting back to the basics." Plummer said Wednesday that teams weren't playing the Broncos' passing game any differently. He said that opponents teams were not always concentrating on trying to take away the short passing game. "That's just a flow-of-the-game type of call," Plummer said. "When (the play) comes in from the sideline, the coaches are seeing them playing soft and giving us the easy completion." The Broncos don't seem to want to take that easy completion. The Broncos' tight ends have seven catches though six games - all Broncos tight ends. In the victorious Super Bowl years, the Broncos' tight ends finished with 86 and 71 receptions. The Broncos don't have Sharpe catching those passes, but they can do better than 1.1 catches per game. And where is the fullback out of the backfield? The Broncos have done a decent job of passing to running back Tatum Bell, who could have more than his 13 receptions. But passing to the fullback has almost been nonexistent. None of this means the Broncos fail to have good athletes in those positions. The Broncos simply aren't using those positions the way this offense was meant to use them. Tight ends are an integral aspect of this offense. Fullbacks create enough of a wrinkle to make linebackers blink. They both help move the ball. Let us see what Plummer can do when the plays are called and the personnel is used the right way - the way it was all used last season. Plummer deserves that opportunity

10-28-2006, 08:44 PM	#13
watermock "Hoodie Jr" "Hug me!" Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Hot Springs, Ouachitah Posts: 77,090	I'm not going thru this field of idiots. Fact is he threw it up for grabs and Walker brought it down. That's reality. wow...you can nit pick from a sky view? Guess what...players play at ground level...that's what they DO. The real question is why a TE wasn't sitting in the hole in the zone. Last edited by watermock; 10-28-2006 at 08:46 PM..

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

10-28-2006, 11:43 AM	#2
GonzoLays Five Tool Poster Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 5,650 Adopt-a-Bronco: #3 DJ	I don't know, maybe Scheffler stinks. It is not outside the realm of possibilities that he could be a bust. We all know Alexander is a terrible pass receiving tight end. OR! Shanahan intentionally kept the offense vanilla because he knew he could beat the first six teams playing that way. You play to win the game per se. St. Louis -- They blindsided us. Don't know if we ran a full offense in that game with all the new guys. KC -- definitely played that game safe NE -- Opened up a little more against a good team Bal -- didn't show much Oakland -- bland as can be Cleveland -- an uncharacteristic offense, a bunch of pass plays. Maybe we were giving Indy something to think about. This is game we open the playbook and start clicking. Watch the TE's be a major factor in this game. Hopefully You know what they say, great defenses always beats great offenses. Denver 20, Indy 13

10-28-2006, 11:56 AM	#4
ludo21 RIP Darrent Williams Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Glendale, AZ Posts: 17,898 Adopt-a-Bronco: Paul Ernster	Thats actually a good breakdown of the first 6 games there Gonzo. I know that if we wanna win vs the Colts, we gotta open up things and put some points n the board. We have scored just enough to win, and Jake has made enough plays to win us 5 games, it is strange, but history tells us that this wont last long.

10-28-2006, 12:15 PM	#6
Popps TEAM FIRST. Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 29,785	I'm sure this article is going to get ripped to shreds. It's interesting and looks a little deeper into the problem than most. That's how the offense is supposed to work. We saw that passing game in Denver last season. We're not seeing it now. And we're not seeing Plummer changing the plays at the line of scrimmage very often, which means the play calls are still coming from Shanahan. I think that's what people who are looking at this from a fairly neutral perspective are saying. How is it that Plummer was highly effective for three years, at least from a numbers perspective... and then now looks so stagnant. I just watched the Browns tape again. Now, given.. he just made some stupid throws, without question. But, there were (again) a lot of plays where you're watching him go through reads and not having anyone to throw to. People get angry at him for locking on Rod or Javon, but what would YOU do if you were a QB? I know I'd be throwing to those two before Sheffler, if things weren't going well. Jake has always made a few boneheaded throws per game. But, he's also always sparked enough offense to put up good numbers and justify sticking with him. So, what... did he just forget how to play after three years in our system? To me, you've got two choices... 1. We have a new O.C. Teams almost always struggle for a while under a new coordinator and Jake was groomed by Kubiak, and is struggling without him. 2. Jake is afraid of Jay. As silly as that sounds, who knows... maybe it's true. I always took Jake as the type that would be fired up by the competition. But, maybe he was more comfortable knowing he had the support of the staff? Some QBs probably function better knowing that they are "the man," while some might need a back-up to push them. Or, here's the least popular choice in the internet world..... maybe it's a little of both? Maybe it's not a black/white issue? (Gasp!) Anyway, I'll guarantee you this much... this will be settled in two weeks. We're playing our two toughest games in a row coming up. Jake keeps or loses his job over these next two weeks.

10-28-2006, 08:13 PM	#10
Cito Pelon Attack at all times . . . Happy dog at the Divide Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: AFC West Championshipville Posts: 15,192 Adopt-a-Bronco: Elvis	On Shanny's show tonite he broke down one of the long completions to Javon at Cleve. It was a "go" route, three WR's and a TE streaking straight down the field, Tatum heads through the line and according to Shanny has two options - go left or right of the LB after what looked like about a 5-8 yd deep pattern. All four streaking receivers are blanketed w/one on one coverage, Jake decides to toss it to Javon. Now, meanwhile the entire middle of the field is wide, wide open. It was a shot from the upper deck, so I could see the whole field. So I have to ask, why is Tatum, a TE, somebody not expoiting that huge open spot? My answer is Shanny doesn't give receivers leeway on their patterns. They have to run a route as planned no matter what the DB is doing. Other O's don't do that. Now, other teams you'll see the QB throw one way, and the WR goes the other way. They didn't read the D the same way. Denver, I rarely see that. On the other hand, with other O's, I'll see some big plays come out of a receiver seeing a huge open hole to run into, or just stop when he's in a hole. Mediator I believe pointed out to me some time ago that Rod will do that. Nevertheless, I still have to wonder what if Shanny loosens up a little bit and lets some receivers adjust their routes? And, please, I don't want to hear Jake couldn't handle it. If the receivers are not getting open the way the O is run right now, maybe the O should change the philosophy a little bit, relax a little bit. As it is right now, many times Jake just doesn't have an open receiver to throw to. And, please, I don't want to hear Jake is inaccurate or misses open receivers constantly. Every Qb in the league is off-target 3-4 times out of every 10. I just wonder at times if Shanny is not so hard ass he insists on total control of every motion his O makes, and thereby costs some first downs/big plays.

10-28-2006, 08:39 PM	#12
Jetmeck Not a Chief's board Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 5,379	You r nuts. Jake is inaccurate as I have ever seen a FIRST qb. ....What the hell you talking about, nobody told HIM to force the ball into double or triple coverage or overthrow it badly.

10-28-2006, 09:00 PM	#16
Atwater His Ass Ring of Famer Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 5,360 Adopt-a-Bronco: None	As much as I would like to believe this whole idea that we are just holding our cards close to the vest, I just don't buy it. A playoff spot is not guarenteed and I think, sooner rather than later, we are going to have to start playing better on offense.