The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Orange Mane Discussion > Orange Mane Central Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-15-2011, 09:02 AM   #1
mwill07
Ring of Famer
 
mwill07's Avatar
 
Lurker Extraordinaire

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 2,107

Adopt-a-Bronco:
VMFM
Default Lets talk about the defense

The 2010 defense was historically bad...statistically, one of the worst since the early 80's. Since they went to a 16 game schedule, there have been only 5 other teams to allow more points and yards.

Looking at the players though, I'm not sure why: We have two HoF players in the backfield in Dawkins and Bailey, a decent corner opposite Champ in Goodman, a decent nickel in Cox, DJ is not terrible, and obviously some question marks in the DL.

Comparing this defense to the 2008, I would have to think that they would be much better - no Niko, no Boss, better safeties, better DL....On paper, the 2010 D looks to me like it should have been a lot better than the 2008 debacle, but it wasn't.

So - why was the D so bad? I'm having trouble putting my finger on it...The only thing I can come up with is that the pass rush was completely non-existant up until the SD game in week 17, but there have been other defenses that have no rush that weren't quite as bad...16x this decade alone.

Last edited by mwill07; 01-15-2011 at 06:13 PM..
mwill07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 01-15-2011, 09:07 AM   #2
TheReverend
Permanent Facepalm
 
TheReverend's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 37,712

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Mike Shanahan
Default

I'm from the future and I can confirm that the 2111 defense was historically bad.
TheReverend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 09:11 AM   #3
Dr. Broncenstein
Ring of Famer
 
Dr. Broncenstein's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Sterile Fields
Posts: 13,969

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Trey Gowdy
Default

Part of the problem is that Bailey and Dawkins were approaching 140 years old, and by all accounts dead at the time.
Dr. Broncenstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 09:20 AM   #4
Inkana7
Ring of Famer
 
Inkana7's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 8,583

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Bradley Roby
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Broncenstein View Post
Part of the problem is that Bailey and Dawkins were approaching 140 years old, and by all accounts dead at the time.
Dawkins, God yes, Bailey, no. Dawkins is responsible for a lot of our big plays this year, but the complete and utter lack of passrush is what really did this defense in.
Inkana7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 09:25 AM   #5
TheReverend
Permanent Facepalm
 
TheReverend's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 37,712

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Mike Shanahan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Inkana7 View Post
Dawkins, God yes, Bailey, no. Dawkins is responsible for a lot of our big plays this year, but the complete and utter lack of passrush is what really did this defense in.
You should check out this album:

TheReverend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 09:35 AM   #6
Dr. Broncenstein
Ring of Famer
 
Dr. Broncenstein's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Sterile Fields
Posts: 13,969

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Trey Gowdy
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReverend View Post
You should check out this album:

Either he's oblivious (my theory) or it's a very sophisticated troll technique.
Dr. Broncenstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 09:35 AM   #7
Inkana7
Ring of Famer
 
Inkana7's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 8,583

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Bradley Roby
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReverend View Post
You should check out this album:

Inkana7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 09:36 AM   #8
Mediator12
OM analyst
 
Mediator12's Avatar
 
Roby AND Latimer?Who the Hell Knew?

Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: INDY
Posts: 10,135

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mwill07 View Post
The 2111 defense was historically bad...statistically, one of the worst since the early 80's. Since they went to a 16 game schedule, there have been only 5 other teams to allow more points and yards.

Looking at the players though, I'm not sure why: We have two HoF players in the backfield in Dawkins and Bailey, a decent corner opposite Champ in Goodman, a decent nickel in Cox, DJ is not terrible, and obviously some question marks in the DL.

Comparing this defense to the 2008, I would have to think that they would be much better - no Niko, no Boss, better safeties, better DL....On paper, the 2010 D looks to me like it should have been a lot better than the 2008 debacle, but it wasn't.

So - why was the D so bad? I'm having trouble putting my finger on it...The only thing I can come up with is that the pass rush was completely non-existant up until the SD game in week 17, but there have been other defenses that have no rush that weren't quite as bad...16x this decade alone.
Really easy answer. They have the worst front seven, they did not play better than their talent level in the front seven, and the one true pass rusher they have in the front seven was hurt in TC and never played a down this year.

The DL has to be addressed and it has to be upgraded. The LB's are all just guys and none of them make the players around them better or can audible to better defensive plays when they are not in a good one. The secondary is only adequate behind that. Injuries and youth hurt last year.

There is some talent there, and there is some youth. Now, they need a scheme, a Coordinator, a staff, FA, and a Draft to address all the problems. They need to find a scheme and stick to it for awhile and they will get better. Having one of the deepest defensive drafts in a decade will sure help.
Mediator12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 09:45 AM   #9
mwill07
Ring of Famer
 
mwill07's Avatar
 
Lurker Extraordinaire

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 2,107

Adopt-a-Bronco:
VMFM
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mediator12 View Post
Really easy answer. They have the worst front seven, they did not play better than their talent level in the front seven, and the one true pass rusher they have in the front seven was hurt in TC and never played a down this year.

The DL has to be addressed and it has to be upgraded. The LB's are all just guys and none of them make the players around them better or can audible to better defensive plays when they are not in a good one. The secondary is only adequate behind that. Injuries and youth hurt last year.

There is some talent there, and there is some youth. Now, they need a scheme, a Coordinator, a staff, FA, and a Draft to address all the problems. They need to find a scheme and stick to it for awhile and they will get better. Having one of the deepest defensive drafts in a decade will sure help.
so that's the answer - this front 7 is historically bad? I suppose I could see that - only Ayers and DJ were not discarded by their former team...Still though - I think there's more to it, and that's probably scheme, which falls on Martindale's lap. Simply, he wasn't good enough to mask deficiencies.

It will be very interesting to see how this team performs under Fox (Mora?)
mwill07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 09:46 AM   #10
Jesterhole
Ring of Famer
 
Jesterhole's Avatar
 
Ridin' the McFailboat...

Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,672
Default

Oh, the classics...

Jesterhole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 10:15 AM   #11
Mediator12
OM analyst
 
Mediator12's Avatar
 
Roby AND Latimer?Who the Hell Knew?

Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: INDY
Posts: 10,135

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mwill07 View Post
so that's the answer - this front 7 is historically bad? I suppose I could see that - only Ayers and DJ were not discarded by their former team...Still though - I think there's more to it, and that's probably scheme, which falls on Martindale's lap. Simply, he wasn't good enough to mask deficiencies.

It will be very interesting to see how this team performs under Fox (Mora?)
It's actually three things:

1. The talent is below average in the front 7.
2. The talent was injured in the front seven.
3. The guys they were replaced with were not able to execute the scheme because there were so many holes OC's were able to exploit.

This was not a solid Defense to start the year, some players like Jamal williams were not able to conme back to form, some regressed, and some never were able to play at a solid replacement level.

When you have a situation like that, where there are so many holes, it is really impossible to assess the scheme. What you can assess is how well backups could play if starters went down and how well they were coached. Unfortuntely, it is almost impossible for fans to spend the time to break that down as the coaches have done with the game film already.

The new D coordinator is going to have to watch last years film in order to see what kind of scheme these guys can play. Then, the new staff has to assess how each of the previous players would fit into the new Coordinators scheme. Finally, the FO will have to fill the gaps with the players they can acquire in FA or the draft.

It is not very easy and its a long process. However, if it is done right this group can be at least average next year or better. It all depends on if they can learn, buy in, and play the next scheme. This year was just an exercise in futility.
Mediator12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 11:53 AM   #12
Agamemnon
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mwill07 View Post
so that's the answer - this front 7 is historically bad? I suppose I could see that - only Ayers and DJ were not discarded by their former team...Still though - I think there's more to it, and that's probably scheme, which falls on Martindale's lap. Simply, he wasn't good enough to mask deficiencies.

It will be very interesting to see how this team performs under Fox (Mora?)
Do you recall during the last Chargers game when the commentators were talking about how Turner had told them he believed there were areas that were unsound in Martindale's scheme that could be exploited? Do you know how bad it is when a coach actually comes out and says that? That means there were probably holes in his scheme that mack trucks could be driven through. At that point I no longer had any doubt that a large portion of our problems were the result of poor coaching rather than the players alone. The roster has a lot of issues, but a good coach could probably have had them at 20th in the league at least.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 12:47 PM   #13
WolfpackGuy
Call me, "Maybe"
 
WolfpackGuy's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Delaware
Posts: 7,394
Default

Don't forget the offense taking entire halves off the last two years.

The defense was already suspect enough without being left on the field for long stretches.
WolfpackGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 01:14 PM   #14
enjolras
Ring of Famer
 
enjolras's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 7,834
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mwill07 View Post
Comparing this defense to the 2008, I would have to think that they would be much better - no Niko, no Boss, better safeties, better DL....On paper, the 2010 D looks to me like it should have been a lot better than the 2008 debacle, but it wasn't.
I don't think it's the best comparison, tho. The 2047 defense was very much weaker in the back, but played much stronger up front. On paper it was a worse defense, but superior coaching really got the best out of them.

I really think the issue was just how poorly they adapted to the addition of the hover-back. You need a linebacker who can move vertically more effectively, and they just didn't have that.
enjolras is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 01:21 PM   #15
thumpc
Perennial Pro-bowler
 
thumpc's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The Future
Posts: 773

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Richard Quinn
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agamemnon View Post
Do you recall during the last Chargers game when the commentators were talking about how Turner had told them he believed there were areas that were unsound in Martindale's scheme that could be exploited? Do you know how bad it is when a coach actually comes out and says that? That means there were probably holes in his scheme that mack trucks could be driven through. At that point I no longer had any doubt that a large portion of our problems were the result of poor coaching rather than the players alone. The roster has a lot of issues, but a good coach could probably have had them at 20th in the league at least.
Was it John Lynch calling the game? He was downright exasperated calling one game, saying the LBs never came off zone to pick a player/route to cover when they all dropped back. They gave up an easy score, seemed oblivious, JL broke it down and blamed shoddy preparation, not utilizing obvious keys in the backfield that he discovered while preparing as a game commentator.
thumpc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 01:30 PM   #16
Agamemnon
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thumpc View Post
Was it John Lynch calling the game? He was downright exasperated calling one game, saying the LBs never came off zone to pick a player/route to cover when they all dropped back. They gave up an easy score, seemed oblivious, JL broke it down and blamed shoddy preparation, not utilizing obvious keys in the backfield that he discovered while preparing as a game commentator.
No it was someone else. John Lynch clearly wasn't a fan of what was going on with his second team though. I do remember that.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 01:46 PM   #17
OABB
sarcasm font
 
OABB's Avatar
 
always on.

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Los angeles
Posts: 7,445

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Knowshon Moreno
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by enjolras View Post
I don't think it's the best comparison, tho. The 2047 defense was very much weaker in the back, but played much stronger up front. On paper it was a worse defense, but superior coaching really got the best out of them.

I really think the issue was just how poorly they adapted to the addition of the hover-back. You need a linebacker who can move vertically more effectively, and they just didn't have that.
****ing brilliant.
OABB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 05:43 PM   #18
fontaine
Ring of Famer
 
fontaine's Avatar
 
Go John Manning!

Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 13,154
Default

What did people expect with practice squad rejects, players that were cut from other teams and over the hill or injured DL?

But that's nothing unique for McDaniels. He tried to do the same thing on offense starting Baptiste and Daniels with a rookie Center.

I can't think of any other coach who completely disregarded the trenches as badly as McDaniels did in just two years here and the guy did it while having more top draft picks than any other team during that time. He was too busy spending luxury picks on a 2nd blocking TE, RB at 12th overall etc etc.
fontaine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 05:44 PM   #19
OrangeSe7en
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReverend View Post
I'm from the future and I can confirm that the 2111 defense was historically bad.
He's from the future.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 06:03 PM   #20
Rascal
RIP
 

Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 17,278

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Turf
Default

I beginning to think we should switch back to the 4-3.
Rascal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 06:10 PM   #21
HILife
Ring of Famer
 
HILife's Avatar
 
Mrs. Alicia Hilife

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: DC - NOVA - DMV - VA - Take your pick
Posts: 4,599
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mwill07 View Post
The 2111 defense was historically bad...statistically, one of the worst since the early 80's. Since they went to a 16 game schedule, there have been only 5 other teams to allow more points and yards.

Looking at the players though, I'm not sure why: We have two HoF players in the backfield in Dawkins and Bailey, a decent corner opposite Champ in Goodman, a decent nickel in Cox, DJ is not terrible, and obviously some question marks in the DL.

Comparing this defense to the 2008, I would have to think that they would be much better - no Niko, no Boss, better safeties, better DL....On paper, the 2010 D looks to me like it should have been a lot better than the 2008 debacle, but it wasn't.

So - why was the D so bad? I'm having trouble putting my finger on it...The only thing I can come up with is that the pass rush was completely non-existant up until the SD game in week 17, but there have been other defenses that have no rush that weren't quite as bad...16x this decade alone.
The problem is the Josh McDaniels IV does not now how be a GM. He traded away are HoF Long Snapper and Place Kicker. I say FIRE JOSH MCDANIELS!
HILife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 06:13 PM   #22
bombay
Ring of Famer
 
bombay's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: denver
Posts: 5,910
Default

The Broncos need to spend their first two picks on a DT and another DL. Fairly and Heyward would work for me, or Fairly and Liugit, or Darious in combination with one of the others.
bombay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 06:16 PM   #23
mwill07
Ring of Famer
 
mwill07's Avatar
 
Lurker Extraordinaire

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 2,107

Adopt-a-Bronco:
VMFM
Default

all right jerkos...I just caught the 2111typo...no idea how that happened - I'll chalk that up to fat-finger-syndrome. Now I get why people were making wise-cracks about 2043.

Let's talk more about the 2010 D. I do remember the comment about Norv saying the D was fundamentally unsound...any idea what he was talking about?
mwill07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 06:17 PM   #24
HILife
Ring of Famer
 
HILife's Avatar
 
Mrs. Alicia Hilife

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: DC - NOVA - DMV - VA - Take your pick
Posts: 4,599
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mwill07 View Post
The 2010 defense was historically bad...statistically, one of the worst since the early 80's. Since they went to a 16 game schedule, there have been only 5 other teams to allow more points and yards.

Looking at the players though, I'm not sure why: We have two HoF players in the backfield in Dawkins and Bailey, a decent corner opposite Champ in Goodman, a decent nickel in Cox, DJ is not terrible, and obviously some question marks in the DL.

Comparing this defense to the 2008, I would have to think that they would be much better - no Niko, no Boss, better safeties, better DL....On paper, the 2010 D looks to me like it should have been a lot better than the 2008 debacle, but it wasn't.

So - why was the D so bad? I'm having trouble putting my finger on it...The only thing I can come up with is that the pass rush was completely non-existant up until the SD game in week 17, but there have been other defenses that have no rush that weren't quite as bad...16x this decade alone.
Seriously, what's a 2111 Defense? You name the defense based on how many yards they give up per game?
HILife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 06:19 PM   #25
mwill07
Ring of Famer
 
mwill07's Avatar
 
Lurker Extraordinaire

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 2,107

Adopt-a-Bronco:
VMFM
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fontaine View Post
What did people expect with practice squad rejects, players that were cut from other teams and over the hill or injured DL?

But that's nothing unique for McDaniels. He tried to do the same thing on offense starting Baptiste and Daniels with a rookie Center.

I can't think of any other coach who completely disregarded the trenches as badly as McDaniels did in just two years here and the guy did it while having more top draft picks than any other team during that time. He was too busy spending luxury picks on a 2nd blocking TE, RB at 12th overall etc etc.
When looking at the O last year, it was pretty clear that the plan, barring injury, was to start rookies @ C & G, with no clear veterans who could step in if they struggled. It didn't occur to me at the time how reckless that was. Letting Weigmann walk was one of many terrible moves, and I wonder how that went down.
mwill07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:37 AM.


Denver Broncos