fall behind by three touchdowns early on. So far our offense has not allowed opponents much of a choice as far as game plans go.

If, unlike me, you’re in to Fantasy maybe you should pick up Patrick Ramsey this week. I have a feeling we may see him before the game is over. Anything can happen but on paper this looks like a blowout of monumental proportions.

Seriously, there may be records set this weekend.

recommended!

i think he is the #1 qb on that team. just my opinion, here. shouldn’t matter with bowe and gonzalez the only receiving threats. my questions on the d are this:

 it seems the d has an attacking stance vs. the run(by numbers), and a conservative stance vs. the pass(by numbers, also). i haven’t seen them get burned too often with a long passing play on an obvious running down, while the reverse seems to hold true. we are getting beat on screens/draws/quick hits on obvious passing plays with everybody backpedaling. i don’t really see the correlation between being successful in the rushing d, and unsuccessful in the passing d. totally different looks, no? we have 7-8 guys back on passing downs, and 7-8 guys up on running plays. isn’t this just a reflection of where we are putting our players, and shouldn’t we have man coverage on receivers that are so outnumbered in that case?

as far as the pass-rush, i also don’t see the “disguising” that has shanny referred to, much. we still sent only three alot, or the 4th was trying to cover the player out of the backfied, or an area. a 4-man rush with this d-line isn’t going to do it, either, but i don’t see how more blitzing on passing downs can hurt our run d on running downs when we stack the box to stop it. i think the pass-rush is the only major problem with the defense right now(well, and paymah), and i feel we have to blitz with the players we have this season if we are even trying to improve this aspect. if our lb’s and their speed are the strength of this d, then why don’t we use them in the rush as a traditional 3-4 would? i don’t believe we are built for this allignment, but if we are going to use it anyway, we need to help out our less-than-spectacular d-line.

as always, ht, great post, and please help me out with understanding the 3-0-8, as it looks to me

But I don’t think he has much of anywhere to go, and KC must not think too highly of him to relegate him to being their third choice.

Your other points are well taken too. My only thought is that Denver is playing the 3 man fronts because they just don’t have a credible pass rush, and are too afraid of the run to try blitzing the LBs.

Seriously, nothing frightened me more than not being able to stop an opponents run game. In the years I coached, it only happened once to me, and I’ll never forget it. It wasn’t even at the HS level. I was coaching middle school ball at the time (def coord, as always) and the other team had a RB that was several years older than everyone else (a long story). He just plowed through my kids (and we were undefeated for years prior to this game). The only way I was able to stop him was to assign players to jack him on every play (the other team ran up the middle every single play). It was like living a nightmare.

I think the effect of last year (not stopping the run) has terrifed our coaching staff. We’re keeping safeties in the box, and we’re holding back LBs from blitzing. By throwing the ball early and often, I think we’re trying to keep other teams from running as well.

I don’t see the disguising either. This probably was a reference to the NO game where we went with a 3-4 (I haven’t seen it yet).

The 3-0-8 is a formation with a function, but I’m at a loss to explain why Denver uses it so often. If we needed to prevent a long gain in the last minute of a game, and the clock was running, and the opponent needed a score plus an onside kick, I could see it. But as of now, I’m utterly confused by a lot of things I’m seeing on defense. I’m still waiting for Denver to develop an “identity”, such as a system I can define, or something that they do with effectiveness and consistency.

the fear of the run on every play is the best only idea i have heard yet as to why we are sitting back on passing downs. you would think the back 6-7 guys would be enough to stop a first down on a long run attempt, but this may be a case of the “baby steps” approach, or just poor tackling in the secondary should a rb get by the lb’s. maybe we’re just trying to make the offense one-dimensional, with alot more work to do as the season moves on. too many new players/confusion, perhaps. i agree this situation is better than last years’. stopping the run is priority #1, absolutely. but this almost cost us 2 wins, already, hence my wrath.

now shanny said this, and i’m even more confused now: “If you have a three-man rush, you’re not really sure who is coming. The disadvantage of a four-man front is they know the front four is usually coming and you know what the coverage is.” i know who is coming, the 3 down-linemen! even with 4 linemen, does it really matter which 3 come at 5-6 blockers? and what about disguising one of the four rushers, with 5 on the line? a little better, no? also, how do they know our coverages with a standard 4-man rush, anyway? he doesn’t even mention the idea of bringing more than 4, but zone-blitzing is all about disguising blitzers, right? have we ditched that idea, or are the players not ready/good enough for it? i though speed was our game, and we don’t possess 3 bonafide rushers, or anyone to collapse the pocket, like a stud nt. looks like fear of the big play, again.

i just really believe we could improve the pass defense by sending even just 4-5, on only obvious passing downs, or even just 3rd-and-long, something. there are situations that call for the conservative approach, i agree, but this is a scary base package against the pass. i’m positive if we stop doing this, we will get off the field more often than we have been, and not be burned for longer gains as much as we possibly fear. against weaker offenses and qb’s, we may use this approach less often, or even with greater success(worse qb accuracy), or we may make them all look like joe montana. either way, against the big boys, it has to go. remember gannon’s 22 straight pass completions? ray rhodes? let’s hope they soon have this figured out. the fact that we won the last 2 games is of no consolation to me that we are on the right path, here. if we slowly phase this out while getting acclimated to our players/coaches/schemes, then i have no problem with taking that direction, if we have to. but i’m concerned that isn’t it, and an opportunity in the afc may be wasted. i’m going to have to trust they see this isn’t the way to go. maybe a few losses will get the message across better, but i’m trying to avoid that. my ranting is done(until sunday), thank you for your patience, and here’s to 4-0!

Great post. All Ready!