Eddie Royal as a specialist type of player. From what I have seen and heard of Royal is that he is hungry to be more than just a role player. He wants to start and make big plays on offense.

The point is, he hasn’t play an NFL down. We do not know how durable the guy is or if he is a Stokley type of player. Just because you would prefer him to fill that kind of role doesn’t mean he is suited for that role. What if he turns out to be our best deep threat? Would that mean he would compliment BMarsh perfectly on the outside?

If memory serves me correctly, Rod Smith was a punt return guy while a WR too. We value a top WR more than we value a top Return specialist. If Eddie Royal can prove he is a real threat at the WR position then I don’t think Shanny cares if he returns punts and kicks. He’ll go find someone else to do that. In the end, Offense wins football games…

I’ll grant that ST gives us field position, but do we need a GREAT ST or an AVERAGE ST to win football games with this offense? We could easily plug Jack Williams or another speedster in as a return and keep Royal on offense where he is our viable deep threat. IF the hype about Eddie Royal in QB Camp proves that he can play the WR position then name one other guy on the depth chart that can become our compliment deep threat opposite BMarsh.

I am not going to argue against the other examples you gave because I think you are absolutely right about them. I just think you might be wrong about Eddie Royal’s role. We can’t always have a team full of specialists…we do need every down guys because we just don’t have the room on our roster for very many specialist guys. So far Royal looks to me like our deep threat on offense…yes he can return kicks well too, but so can Jack Williams…

Great post by the way, you really know how to get the blood flowing and the debate energized about any topic! You’ve got a great recommendation from me today! I only wish I could stick around all day and debate the issue, but Indiana Jones awaits me today!!! ;)

Take the Eagles for example. They’ve recently had one heck of a time finding an explosive return game. Put Brian Westbrook back there and it has solved their problems. But putting B-West back there is also a problem in itself. The Eagles have decided not to risk the further injury on a back like that.

As far as Royal goes, Shanahan has even mentioned at QB camp that he likes Royal and we may very well also see him at wide receiver next season in ADDITION to punt returns and the like.

If I could, I would vote for something in between the two options, using some of our top guys sparingly. Take a versatile guy like Hester for example. He makes that offense ten times better whenever he steps in the game. You don’t necessarily have to go back to the whole “well what about Bailey at WR?” thing, especially now that Denver has picked up depth at the receiver position. I think if you have quality depth at a position, why not try players in other roles (of course I don’t mean all the time as you have to watch for injuries).

Take the Niko situation you pointed out. Not much depth at linebacker or maybe MLB for that matter (depending on your faith in those back-up guys). That’s a situation where maybe I wouldn’t have the guy on ST. Even though it’s not realistic, let’s throw out another hypothetical situation. Say the Broncos sign Odell Thurman and he looks like he’s back in his rookie year form. Then I’d obviously consider throwing Niko in on ST, as the Broncos certainly need help. However, you can also find special teams players as UFAs or in other places. Guys with strong motors that know how to tackle can be used in those types of situations and they don’t necessarily have to be starters elsewhere (there are PLENTY of good special teamers not in the top five on teams rosters in terms of talent).

I guess finally, I’ll address that line. I don’t see this question as that much of an issue there, because I think the rotation will be paramount. It’s also good to have versatile guys who can hold for the pass and do fairly well stopping the run…which Denver may have.

You’ve given us a solid question and a great topic once again.

Love your enthusiasm, Zappa, but I’ve got to disagree with your conclusion. This one really got me thinking.

We are talking about football players, not foosball players. If a guy is unable to stay healthy in whatever role he is put in then he should be playing foosball instead of football. This is a man’s sport. I don’t want a team full of brittle babies who can’t play every down.

But almost no one does play every down, and it’s not realistic to expect it. Today’s NFL involves some of the biggest, strongest, fastest (in equipment) toughest guys on the planet. When two men collide, both strong, ripped, conditioned, in perfect shape, the bigger, or faster, delivers far more foot-pounds of force than a smaller man. The smaller mass cannot absorb as much force and disipate it.

From a different perspective, the amount of force in any pro football collision is sufficient to tear muscles, tendons and ligaments. We try to minimize that with pads, helmets and rules such as those against spearing, clipping (showing my age), etc. But it’s a question of vectors, and if you’re hit wrong, well, you’re injured.

One equation for force (though only one) is mass times velocity sqared. That’s another reason that fast guys are desired – that speed can, if the player is talented, be translated into power. It is far better to give than to receive. The Not for Long is very, very fast.

Some people, genetically, have stronger connective tissue than others, which is great. They normallly get injured less, as do those like Pittman who train constantly at a very high level. But even those are injured by the right hit

Ok, so? So, the more plays you are on the field for, over time, the more likely that injuries great and small, will occur. And sooner or later it will cut the average or even the above average player’s career that much shorter.

Rod Smith was a wonderful genetic miracle and a he** of a player. In the end, his body gave out. They always do. Smith also was two inches and thirty pound of protective muscle heavier than Royal who is in roughly the lowest 1 or 2 percent fo the league in height and weight. We need to use each guy, as HT is pointing out, in the best way for that guy AND the team, rather than holding the world to a standard that will certainly get them hurt. You don’t use 200 lb guys to play DT for the same reason.

I guess that I have such an opinion because I’m a retired doc. I worked with injured people in clinic every day, and I was also a semi-pro athlete for 15 years. Injuries happen, Your Dudeness. My point is that there’s no gain in bringing them on. Use Royal, Champ, heck, all of them, in the way that maximizes our total gain in the overall scheme.

Thanks for all the food for thought, folks.

When we get more experienced at QB and as an offense, we can go to a hurry-up which forces the defense to keep the same players on the field, thereby weakening them.

You mentioned:

I even read recently on MHR that someone advocated a 4 WR set for Denver (including the use of Royal).

I believe that was started when Samie Parker was exhulting the quality of our new wideout candidates and suggested it, meaning that we had so much talent that we could/should. I’m tickled to death at the upgrades we seem to have, but you’re right, of course. Our offense is better in a lot of ways – quality of the line (pre-camp and pre-injury, at least), quality of the RB situation, quality of the wideouts ad a healthy Cutler. Changing the offense to push the pass gets away from what Shnahan call Bronco Football, and he’s assured us all that this year they are getting back to their strengths. The zone blocking sets up the run, which permits an easier passing game, which lets us score early and manage the clock. Yes?

related.

When I was in high school (over 15 years ago). We fielded a team in Kansas that was one of the best 8-man teams in the state. The team was senior laiden and very talented. I was a junior that year and was on the sidelines (waiting to play) most of that season. Sadly, we had a coach who was a moron. Instead of using the players he had available during the game to help rest the starters on some plays or series, he kept the starters in about 95% of the time. His strategy worked well for most of the season, but bit him in the playoffs. In the playoffs, we had a 2 touchdown lead in the 4th quarter and blew the game. He played only his starters and they started cramping up. When the game counted the most, the starters were so worn out, they couldn’t even stop a team that was smaller than them. The linemen were blown off the ball and they had no push. The lb and secondary were worn down by running after the receivers. This allowed their fastest player (who was insterted at QB in the 4th quarter) to run wild and score the winning TD.

The next year, I started as a senior. Our team was inxexperienced since most of the players that year didn’t play much at all the previous season. Had those players (including me) been able to sub in for the starters at times the year before, that season would have been better.

It’s like anythng else, if you don’t at least play and develop what you have, you’re in for a long season.

As much as I would love to see the “best players” on the field all the time, it doesn’t hurt to spell them. Use the talent you have so if there is an injury, they can be put in to take up the slack.

HT, since you have some background in this maybe you can add something to it. My rant may be viewed as bitter.

Whether you intended it or not, this post addresses several ideas and thoughts I’ve mentioned over the last week. While I agree with you in principle that a prudent approach should be taken in order to preserve the health and therefore success of the team, other times prudence dictates a riskier course of action. There is a chance of injury on any given play, and the more plays a player runs, the greater chance of injury. But it is exactly that, a chance. If the game is on the line, or it’s the playoffs or a playoff making game and the season is on the line, you also want your best chance of winning. It doesn’t do any good to preserve a player’s health if the season ends because you held them out in a critical game when they could have made a game-winning contribution.

To summarize my position, it is a good idea to rotate players if there is no drop-off in performance or the game isn’t on the line. This would be like pulling your quarterback in the fourth quarter when you are up by 30 points, or rotating your running back because your primary back isn’t the type that is helped by getting in a rhythm. The fundamental idea is what gives your team the best chance to win the Superbowl, and I think on this point we can agree.

On another note, I like to stretch the boundaries of the box and see what is possible. Given the fantastic depth and versatility this team is building, I am wondering what kind of new things it can do in appropriate situations. For example, putting in Graham, Scheffler, Pittman, and Young, an obvious running formation, and then the play sends Scheffler, Pittman, and Young out as receivers? How about this defensive formation? Line up Doom, Thomas, D-Rob, Moss, and Crowder a little bit off the line. Sub out the SS for Crowder. Now the strong side has two D-Lineman to shut down runs to that side, Moss can drop into zone if the TE goes out for a pass, meanwhile Crowder rushes the passer from the edge. Alternatively, the strong side is overloaded for a pass rush, and Moss or Crowder gets through quickly. I don’t even know if this is a legal (or good) formation, but its the kind of stuff I like to think about.

On versatility, I am a huge fan. It lets you adapt your team to counter your opponents strengths and exploit their weaknesses. Also, if your roster is filled with talented versatile players, your depth is increased ten fold.

Great discussion, good job HT.

ok, i think what zappa is saying is this:
we need a deep threat at wr. if parker isn’t the guy, or is cut, then who do we have?

stokely is our slot guy for this year. royal will not see much time there, barring injury.

royal is a 2nd round draft pick, and pr isn’t much of a return(get it?) if he can do more, then we should let him

royal may be tougher/more durable than his size indicates. he is strong, and he played alot in college, so his risk of injury is small, not great

royal has higher value at wr, even #3, than as a pr specialist-more plays, more impact

i think what ht is saying is that:
royal is too light to be an everydown player in the nfl-injury risk is high

we have new weapons at wr(deep threat aside), and don’t need him there

royal has not proven anything at the nfl level yet, so hold your horses

if he can be a kr and pr(2 out of 3), then his value is great enough in these roles

we simply don’t have room for him at wr this year, and adding him into multiple wr formations would not be playing to our strengths

ok, here’s how i see this going:
if parker doesn’t make it, i would not object to using royal as a deep threat for 5-7 plays a game, depending on the score and situation. this should be a happy medium

he may be used at slot this year to spell stokely later on, and to groom him for the future there, but it will be hard not to use stokely in a tight game

royal’s play in the preseason will dictate how much he is being used this year, and where. if he looks really good at wr, shanny will use him there, but not at #2

i am less concerned about his injury risk than most. remember, it is his strength, compactness, and blocking ability that shanny said placed him above deshean jackson and others. he won’t be blocking much as a returner

again, his play will dictate his use, but i believe it will be hard to not put him on the field for a select group of plays. nothing more

i think he will be a spell #3 when we trail, if just to pull some coverage away from #1 and 2, or to open it up underneath. again, if someone else can do this, he won’t be needed here

i agree with ht, that if he is also our kr, then that will be enough use for the rookie. but i don’t think he will be used there because of the above, and our other excellent returning options

in summary, he will have to force the coaches to put him at further risk on offense, but i think he can hold up in a limited/spell role, though not as a #2 receiver. i think shanny had more in mind for him than returner alone. if he shows he can be a weapon, then he will be used as such. if he shows he isn’t ready, or can’t take the punishment on offense, he will be used as pr and maybe #2 kr, at the least. now, you both can rip me apart for my observations and misinterpretations. have fun!

This debate has more depth than our roster!

As for the topic on hand. Overall, I think that we use specialized players who give us our best chance of winning and can carry out their assignment. HT makes a great argument for this.

Agreeing with Zappa, Royal should be allowed to play WR in a specialized role if he works out at WR and still be the PR. If he turns out to be a good #2 or slot and beats someone out of their position, then he’s earned that right. For all intensive purposed a starting WR has more impact on a game than a PR in terms of downs played.

K2, or any other starting LB, should not play ST.

Zappa you are on track with Royal. He will see time as WR this year. As I have said towards the middle to the end of the year he will start to see more playing time. He was drafted as a PR/KR but if he can be a WR then by all means let the kid play.

HT are you telling me that if you were a D-coordinator and you saw Royal come out on the field it wouldn’t make you a little nervous? I think he will force Defenses to adjust.
When talking about the 4 WR set, I think it was ment as a change up not a change in systems or style of play. More as a hey look at how else we can come at you. Surely you can agree giving the D different looks has value. Surely Zappa never ment that a Kicker should play every down as you suggested.

Here is the bottom line though, I think we can all agree that with the talent we have at camp right now we can all be excited about the options Coach will have this year. I think with Jay settelilng in we will see the play book really open up this year.

Perhaps we are overlooking the forrest for all the damn trees. Today’s pro schemes are so complex that with the exception of Cutler and Champ, every player is a situational player to a certain extent.

i got to read the article and all the wonderful comments before I got to comment so here it goes…

First off great write up HT I loved it. It is something I have been thinking about quite a bit recently. We have enough talent that we could very well put the “Best” player on the field for each down, which is what I think we do. Each guy has a role to play in this team and does it very effectively or he wouldn’t be on the roster! Now, I think the heart of the article is do we take who is considered the best OVERALL player at the position and put them in every down? I would say no based on the fact that we need players who are familiar and excellent in each situation. Can DOOM line up against a running play? Sure he can. Will he be effective? Most definitely! Will he be the best player on our team to play that position for the purpose of stopping the run? Probably not. I say that with you all knowing I am a huge DOOM fan and think he will excel and possibly become an every down player. Currently we have enough talent on this roster that DOOM can be used in what is his best role while not sacrificing the play to the other team. Now to Royal who is the biggest topic of this comment set, I do believe that coach would not have drafted him if he didn’t see receiver potential. Sure we need Special Team guys, but Coach isn’t going to waste a high round pick on a guy he sees as ONLY a returner. Devin Hester isn’t always going to return kicks only he will get better catching the ball. Eddi has impressed coach enough to make ME think that he could also be going for the #2 slot this year, which would let Jack Williams see more than Practice Squad time. Eddie Royal will be in our rotation as a receiver too. I know that we are all in agreement that we shouldn’t waste a roster spot on just a kickoff guy AND a place kicker. I think the same goes here, Mike is not going to waste a roster spot on a guy who can ONLY return kicks. Royal and J Williams can both return kicks and both can play their position well. I think guys who excel in certain situations will be on the field in certain situations. In Denver Starter is a title which has little meaning in my opinion especially on the defensive line. I think our 45 guys are all going to have a specific role to play. Some might get more playing time but ALL will be solid contributors on this team

as far as the specialist/top guy question, i don’t really know who would be considered a specialist, depth player, or even what packages would contain all starters, if any. there are dozens of them. it would stand to reason a “big nickel” formation would have a specialist brought in-like sam brandon was. but game-planning would also dictate what the “normal” formations would be, so that special nickelback can now be a starter, no? also, special teams would have to be considered all specialists, outside of coverage and return units. maybe the gunner is a specialist, too, i don’t know. i need more information to comment on this one. i see specialists everywhere, really, based on opponent, down and distance, field position, strategy, score, weather, and a host of other factors. are specialists starters in certain packages, and backups in others? too many questions

HT I understand what you are saying. We definately need to develope Royal first. I am just excited about the prospect of the player he will hopefully become. I do think by the middle to end of the season he will be getting some playing time as a wide reciever. I think PR/KR is a great way to start to develope him.
What I ment was I would be nervous with Royal in a 3 WR set.

By the way it was a great write up thanks for you contiuned hard work on this site.