Defense needs to play to strengths.
I think Slowik has changed defensive assignments two much, creating too many mental mistakes, and taking players out of what they do best. This has led to inconsistency, big plays, and not having any defensive strength to play off of. It has also slowed the development of our young players, like Moss and Crowder.
We have run straight 4-3, with backers back; 4-3 with the SAM up on the edge; 3-4 with backers up and back, various nickel and dime packages (3-2-6, 4-2-5, 3-3-5). And others to boot. And in all thes intial alignments, we have changed up in multiple ways the gap responsibilities and coverage responsibilites of players. So what happened to the pre-season talk about his one gap defense simplifying things so players can just play? Even though all these defenses have been one gap, there have been too many variations for the consistency we need, and it takes us out of certain player strengths.
So, what are our strengths? Linebacker speed, corner coverage (when aligned properly), and a couple of high motor lineman like Dumervil, and I believe Moss, if given a chance. So here is the defense I think we should run most of the time.
Secondary:
I agree with HT that we need to play cover 2 zone, with man under technique. Champ and Bly need to play aggressive underneath man. If they know they have deep help, then they can be aggressive and make the interceptions we have seen in year's past. I also agree with others, that Champ needs to man up with the #1 WR, Bly on the #2, and Jack Williams on the #3. This is the primary defense the Raiders play, and their results are much better than anything we have done the last couple of years. And Bly and Champ and Jack Williams are just as good as their top 3 CBs. Also, if we stick to a simple cover two deep assignment for our safeties, then I think we can and should try playing Barrett at safety, as he has the best speed and size.
Front Seven:
Has anyone else noticed how fast DJ can get in the backfield, when he is lined up on the edge and told to fly to the ball? Has anyone noticed last year, how well Dumervil can get to the passer, when he is blocked man to man, and he is focused simply on the pass rush? Anyone else notice that Boss Bailey gets on the back and TE coverage when in tight coverage versus when he has to read and react in a zone drop? Here is the unorhodox but best answer.
A five man front, with 3 DT types on the interior (or at least with Crowder or Ekuban as power ends on one end, with 2 DTs inside), with Dumervil outside technique on the TE side, and with DJ lined up on the edge on the weakside. Both DJ and Dumervil are to crash to the RB or QB, or read and react to dump passes to RBs on the edge. The 3 interior lineman play run, bull rush, and stop draws and middle screens. Our Inside LB plays in the middle and flows to the TB for tackle or coverage. Boss plays man to man on the TE, and follows him in motion wherever he goes.
With five on the line of scrimmage, Dumervil will have man on man blocks, DJ can use his speed to crash and chase from behind, and our interior is plugged with 3 DTs. Also with, our CBs tighter and safeties deep, we can send corner blitzes. We can also run a safety down at the snap to cover the TE or fill the middle, and allow Boss or Webster to blitz.
We may have seen a similar basid defense defensive alignment when DJ blew up that 3rd and short at the end of the N.O.'s game, but I think we should run this defense most plays (except for goal line and 3rd and really long). And while it would not be perfect, we would create a lot more negative plays and big plays, and we would play into our own personel strengths.
This is a Fan-Created Comment on MileHighReport.com. The opinion here is not necessarily shared by the editorial staff of MHR
1 recs |
27 comments
Comments
Our defense is suffering from the same thing the entire Raider organization suffers from...
lack of continuity from the top. We’ve had how many DC’s since our last Super Bowl 10 years ago? Shanny needs to find a guy and stick with him through thick and thin…right now its thin, or thick, whichever you think is worse. ;-)
If God is not a Bronco fan, then WHY are sunsets Blue and Orange? - Jon Tollerud 5/22/08
by Tim Lynch on Sep 29, 2008 8:26 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
That is one thing that annoys me.
I mean we get a new DC every year and never really make any big improvements. I am not in a panic because we have showed improvements. However you can’t get much consistency playing musical chairs.
"It doesn't dissipate" ~ Mike Shanahan
Cutler's 4th qtr/OT game winning drives: 4
by weazel on Oct 1, 2008 12:34 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
R. Ryan as D Coordinator
with the Raiders has had some continuity through the last couple head coaches, so that is why the Raider’s defense has been decent, while their offense has sucked.
by The Gun Young on Sep 29, 2008 9:04 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
his defenses also blow leads in the 4th quarter.
naw I’m good…I dont need that silver and black blooded bastard running things around here.
If God is not a Bronco fan, then WHY are sunsets Blue and Orange? - Jon Tollerud 5/22/08
by Tim Lynch on Sep 29, 2008 10:34 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't mind
We do need to bring in a defensive genius and give him complete control of the defense along with input on personnel and draft decisions. Denver had some great DCs in the past. The defense was our strength through most of our history, but we’ve been in decline lately. It may take the imprint of a strong DC along with some state of the art defensive thinking to make the defense a stellar unit once again. I’m not necessarily endorsing Ryan, although he’s very good at what he does, but we need someone like him to make this unit a force; not just return it to competence.
by Colinski on Sep 30, 2008 5:30 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, I don't want a raider on the Broncos. . .
but his secondary coverage is what Denver needs to do more of (Cover 2 with man under). Many other successful defenses run similar coverage. The one man deep safety is not effective for pass defense, and if the 8th man in the box is not stopping the run, then you must play back to stop the pass.
by The Gun Young on Sep 29, 2008 11:06 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
A raider on the Broncos
Like, Shanahan, for instance?
Kidding, Gun, kidding….Bear’s don’t tease Gun’s during hunting season)…
Fullbacks Rule
by Emmett Smith on Oct 3, 2008 5:33 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Our interior line was not built to have three bull rushing gap stuffers
Other than that shortage of key personnel, I would be very excited to see the D use the scheme you have described.
by Arctic Bronco on Sep 30, 2008 1:30 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Thats why we would use . . .
3 DTs on a five man line, versus the normal 2 DTs on a four man line, to compensate for our lack of DT talent, but also to assure one on one blocking.
by The Gun Young on Sep 30, 2008 7:50 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
it's been used in college
I’ve seen that type of defense and the DEs are like outside LBs in the 3 – 4. And the interior line looked a lot like the 2 DTs and NT in the 3 – 4. I gather it’s better for defensing the run, but the DEs were athletic and could drop into coverage when needed. It was really a lot like a 3 – 4 with the OLBs moved up on the DL
by Colinski on Sep 30, 2008 5:40 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, your right it is a lot like a 3-4 with OLBs tight on the edge.
But I am recommending one of our edge guys be Dumervil, and for him to simply pinch or pressure from the outside, and not to do any typical LB duties, like dropping in the flat – because I do not think he has good lateral movement ability in space like a LB, plus I would want him to stick what he is really good at, pressuring QBs.
by The Gun Young on Oct 1, 2008 5:41 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
The vulnerability of this defense . . . .
would be if a running back got through the first level, or line of scrimmage, then it would be a big run, cause all our linebackers would be up tight.
But we are already giving up big runs, and big pass plays, and at least with this defense we would cause a lot of three and outs and plays for loss, and more turnovers, and we would stop the pass much better, with our two safeties deep.
We the pre-season started and we all speculated about Slowik’s 8 man in the box defense, we anticipated the vulnerability of big plays, but we also thought we would cause a lot of three and outs and a lot of pressure and negative plays. The problem with our defense now is we have not caused the latter. Few three and outs, few negative plays, few turnovers.
This defense would create those negative plays and play into our strengths.
by The Gun Young on Sep 30, 2008 7:56 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Check out this article
SI’s Mike Lombardi evaluates the Broncos. Make sure and look at the link he has to his “no such thing as a shut-down corner” article as well.
Personally, (and I’d love to hear HT’s comments on these articles) I think he’s right on the money. It all starts up front. Look at how the Giants beat the Patriots. It wasn’t because their corners were so awesome. Can anyone name even one of their corners? The Broncos need defensive linemen. Plain and simple.
Or so I'm told.
by MN Bronco on Sep 30, 2008 8:02 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Corey Webster, Aaron Ross, RW McQuarters....
but your point is correct, that it starts up front.
"I am not one of those who think that coming in second or third is winning." -- Robert F. Kennedy
by Ted Bartlett on Sep 30, 2008 8:26 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
HT's comments
I agree with his evaluation of Denver.
I half agree with his thoughts on shut-down corners. I agree the term is used way too much. At any given time, there are maybe three true shut down corners in the League. I also agree that no cornerback can cover a receiver for more than a few precious seconds, and a pass rush is the key to helping corners. But I do believe in the shut down concept. With a half way decent pass rush, Bailey gets unGodly good numbers.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Sep 30, 2008 3:13 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gerard Warren...
is playing well. Someone remind me: why did we dump him?
"Be not like dumb-driven cattle...."
by jcps on Sep 30, 2008 11:00 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I said when he was traded last year
that we would rue the day….well, go ahead, start rueing!
Jason
The Hanging Curve
by poorboywilly on Sep 30, 2008 3:43 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Consider me rued.
That’s ok with me. We’re playing for wins, not media publicity....HT 9/11/08
by firstfan on Sep 30, 2008 4:13 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
so rued
I’m lumpy
Mountains, forest, sea: these render man fierce, but yet do not destroy the man.
by Jeremy Bolander on Sep 30, 2008 5:10 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gerard Warren
We dumped him because Jim Bates is an idiot.
If there's gonna be a collision, you better start it. Larry Csonka..
by bradley on Sep 30, 2008 11:23 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
yeah
Bates did more damage than I’ve seen him credited with. Dumped good defensive linemen because they didn’t fit his “scheme”, then when his scheme turned out to be terrible, either by lack of personnel or perhaps by matchups, we are left without some quality players we had acquired. Perhaps if he was still around his scheme would be starting to fall into place, but most of the linemen we picked up for him turned out to be bad at even the things they were picked up to do (Sam Adams…shudder….), so I kind of doubt that.
Jason
The Hanging Curve
by poorboywilly on Sep 30, 2008 3:47 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bingo
Warren would make a huge difference on this defense right now.
Or so I'm told.
by MN Bronco on Oct 1, 2008 2:41 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree...
…but like I said on another thread, the silver lining is that we used the 6th round pick we got for Warren to take Ryan Torain.
If there's gonna be a collision, you better start it. Larry Csonka..
by bradley on Oct 1, 2008 5:33 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
All of you guys are wrong.
Our defensive problems stemmed from the fact that jhawk stopped the good luck thread. It is pretty obvious. With thread we are 3-0 with things like last second winning plays and mistakes by the officials. Without thread we loose 19-33 even though we have more yards from scrimmage, more first downs and a defense that played pretty darn well considering the lack of luck they had to play with. The whole loss is jhawk’s fault.
That’s ok with me. We’re playing for wins, not media publicity....HT 9/11/08
by firstfan on Sep 30, 2008 4:18 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I concur with Firstfan
Love is a razor and I have walked the line on that silver blade
by broncfanstuckinsd on Sep 30, 2008 4:22 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 




















