Changes to the System - Offense
While we’ve been pondering the changes to the coaching structure I’ve been wondering about some of the patterns of the past season(s). There were a lot of patterns of play that emerged during the season that weren't discussed since Shanahan’s firing and the subsequent coaching search took over the news. I’d like to take a few minutes to look back at what was and to consider starting to plot a course out of the wilderness on the offensive and defensive positions. Starting with the one that we’ll probably (hopefully) change the least - offense - what do you see as the most important changes we have to make – or not make – by position?
QB – Bates and Cutler have a great relationship, but is Bates too inexperienced to groom Cutler without a guiding hand that can improve his decision-making? I think he is, and some of his play calling seemed suspect as well. Can he use a running game the right way to help Jay? And, do we draft a 2nd QB or will Hackney mature into someone usable?
O line – Is the zone blocking scheme going to stay? I think that most posters would agree that it should, but since Alex Gibbs left it seems to have diminished a little. With Weigmann in his last year(s), is there another direction we should look at, starting with our next center? Ten Tigers is a possible center, but also a great guard option. A lot of scouts preferred him there (being thrust into a game with no prep wasn’t a fair try-out – he was excellent in preseason), so we have decisions to make regardless. I was surprised that Hamilton was the weak link at times - do we consider a change? (A quick note on Tigers: His blocking consistency grade of 85.45% was the highest mark of any active NCAA center (grades compiled by The NFL Draft Report)...He averaged eight key blocks/knockdowns per game during his career...On 3,243 offensive snaps over four years, he allowed only one quarterback pressure and was penalized just four times during his career. So - guard or center?)
RB – Whether or not we keep Bobby Turner is up to the next OC and/or HC. Can we agree that you can’t plug anyone in and have them gain 1000 yards anymore, even if they aren’t cut down by bizarre injuries? What role is the RB position going to play in the next year(s)? Finally, is Tatum Bell going to return?
WR/TE – Why are our receivers dropping so many passes? Looking at some film slips, er, clips of how many and when, we might have lost at least one game (and hence the division title) because of this. Is this a coaching problem or something else?
TE – Do we draft or trade for a third TE or are Jackson and Mustard sufficient insurance? With Scheffler’s injury history, I can’t see losing him and his connection with Cutler but we might want to bolster this position in the draft or FA.
Thanks for helping me out. Any thoughts on scheme, coach or players would be appreciated.
This is a Fan-Created Comment on MileHighReport.com. The opinion here is not necessarily shared by the editorial staff of MHR
4 recs |
28 comments
Comments
2 questions...
1. When will Jay develop the ability to look off the coverage. His habit of staring down his receivers is killing me. Will this come with coaching, or experience?
2. I know this might be a touchy subject with some, but when do we start to consider Scheffler injury prone? When he’s in the lineup he dominates, but seems like me misses considerable chunks of games every year.
by donbok1 on Jan 3, 2009 2:24 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
My opinions
1) Not looking off coverage is something that is corrected with coaching and time. Jay has a bad habit (probably developed from his required quick release play behind a weak OL at Vandy). It is natural to follow the target you initialy select, and Jay will need to be coached to change this habit. I believe coaching will help Jay more than experience, and the problem is correctable. It will just take some time to undo years of a bad habit.
2) Very tough call on Scheff. I love the guy, and what he brings to the team. He is also paired with Graham, who is likewise great, but aging. I hate to lose either one, but Scheff is injury prone. I think we should keep Scheff, but start considering bringing in a young TE or two over the next two years.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Jan 3, 2009 2:32 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
If Scheff is expendable...
Chase Coffman could come in and do exactly what he does.. Maybe even better than Scheff. I’m not saying, I’m just saying.. Plus, I think it’s funny when he jumps over little people. And this isn’t just because I’m a Mizzou fan.
In Bowlen we trust. Find someone special.
by papigrande on Jan 3, 2009 3:09 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Coffman catches everything his hands can touch...
but no way can he stretch the field like Scheff. He’s a great pass catching TE but isn’t anywhere near Scheff’s speed.
by donbok1 on Jan 3, 2009 3:25 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
A TE should be drafted in the 2nd day
We have good TEs, but due to injury and age we need to start restocking. Next year Schef will be a 4th year player, and there is no way to know if Pierce can even make the team. Plus, getting a young TE who can develop along with Jay and the young O-Line is a good way to work towards building long term chemistry.
I think getting a younger version of Graham is more important than a younger version of Scheff, as we already have an abundance of targets for Jay.
I agree, Larsen shouldn’t get any bigger. I am getting tired of his bone crushing hits knocking the pixels off my TV, once they fall to the floor they are very hard to find.
by Arctic Bronco on Jan 4, 2009 11:40 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Several thoughts
1) Bates – I know Cutler really wants Bates to stay in place but I have to say that I noticed what certainly appeared to be a pretty substantial drop off in results from Shanny’s scripted 15 plays to when Bates’ playcalling took over. Also there seemed to be little in the way of halftime adjustments. For all the acclaim, there was some problems on offense (most notably turn-overs and dropped passes, but also poor play calling at times as well as the obvious lack of a running attack). It’s hard to say how much of it was Bates’ fault and how much was the players but I am not entirely sold on Bates. Particularly when he loses Shanny’s offensive brilliance and a defensive HC comes to town. Can Bates run the offense single-handed? I’m not sure he can.
2)O-Line – I don’t know how you can come into Denver and change the zone block scheme. It has worked so well for so long and our linemen don’t fit any other scheme (except Clady who can play anything because he is a deity). I guess we will have to wait and see but I think it would be a dumb move for a HC to come in here and change something that fundamental to Denver’s success. Particularly if that HC is a defensive guy.
3) RB – Obviously we have a HUGE stable of RBs to try out during the preseason. I don’t think we need to bring anyone new in. The biggest change in this area in my opinion should be a REAL CLOSE look at the training team. No offense to Greek, but seriously, this many injuries is insane. Particularly since we have had lots of injuries for several seasons.
4) WR- How much of Marshall’s drops have to do with the injury he sustained in the off-season at the hands of that notorious Big Mac wrapper? Hard to say. I think with some time spent on fundamentals this group is fine. Maybe bring in a new slot receiver to study under Stokely for a year or two.
5)TE – Our TE group is fine. Sheff has some lingering issues with his foot that should be 100% by camp. His groin will be solved once our training team stops sucking. Graham has been asking for awhile to be more then just a blocker and once they started giving him his chance in the last half of the season, he proved he’s a stud at receiving and YAC as well. The guy should be a constant pro-bowler if voters took blocking into account as well as receiving. And Jackson is potentially the best 3rd string TE in the NFL. Is he great? No. Does he drop some passes? Yes. But he blocks at an average skill level, makes some amazing catches and, perhaps most importantly, is extremely self motivated and works REAL hard to be where he is. That has worth.
6) Offense as a whole – Mainly we need a few tweaks and the offense is unbeatable. We need a true running threat. And that running threat needs to stay healthy. I think that can be accomplished with the guys we have now and a better training team / regimen. Cutler needs to play a little smarter. Less turn-overs, more looking off defenders, etc. I think a LOT of that will come when he knows he has a viable run game supporting him and a steady defense to take the weight when he is off the field. What those two things would do for his trust in his team would be HUGE and he would be able to relax and take the check-downs and the throw aways when needed.
Check out the website listed below...
by EastCoastBronco on Jan 3, 2009 2:41 PM MST reply actions 2 recs
Great answers, and agreed!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Jan 3, 2009 2:46 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
HUGE stable of RB's?
Young and Hall did nothing this year except get hurt. Torain (and I loved the ability he showed in his one quarter or so of action) but you can’t count on him, especially coming off a knee surgery that takes more than a year to recover from, and he hasn’t played for quite awhile. Pittman is old, and his neck injury is a real concern. Hillis will be great, PJ Pope showed a bit of ability, and let’s hope for Alridge, but we better look for someone in the late rounds.
At wide reciever, after Marshall, Royal, and an aging Stokely, there ain’t much.
Anyone looking for a sign will find one. JB Freeman
All signs fail in time of drought. James M. Green
by bradley on Jan 3, 2009 2:54 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Agree in part.
Still, that’s a lot of RBs to choose from. Not every injury that happened can be attributed to poor preparation (though some can). I am very much for Hillis to return, and think we should be able to find at least two other RBs from our current list.
There really doesn’t have to be much behind the three receivers. We are pretty blessed to have two outstanding WRs in Marshall and Royal, and have a true great at slot in Stokley (despite age). I would argue we have one of the top, if not the top, trios in receivings corps. Beyond those three, one can reasonably only hope for decent back-ups. To keep in slary cap range (and to address the defense), I wouldn’t spend too much bringing in receivers.
Just my opinion.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Jan 3, 2009 3:10 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
CJACK
looked alright in his one play from skrimmage with us… i think it was Guru’s favorite play, a bubble scren but i could be wrong
by robbo650 on Jan 3, 2009 3:17 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Not a bubble screen.
A “quick hit.”
Jackson was coming back to the QB when he caught the ball, as opposed to a bubble screen where the receiver is moving away from the QB. I like the quick hit as it allows for the tackle to “pull” to the outside and block. The receiver then runs upfield off the tackle’s hip. I love that play, but I hate bubble screens to WR’s. Bubbles to TE’s work because they allow the WR to crack down on the LB and put the TE one on one on the CB. The TE then runs over the CB, which is funny.
My school runs all of these plays. Bubbles to WR’s resulted in half (2) of our interceptions that we had all year (4). Both were returned for touchdowns.
In Bowlen we trust. Find someone special.
by papigrande on Jan 3, 2009 3:29 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for that, papi
I didn’t know that. I did notice that we had overall poor success with bubble screens to Royal and Marshall.
Jim Goodman for Broncos GM!
by Emmett Smith on Jan 3, 2009 4:21 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I have a man-crush on CJack...
he’s got some great hands, and had blazing speed coming out of school. Looks bigger now, but still showed some decent speed on return duties. I don’t think he has the return abilities of Royal, but with all the injuries we had, it was nice to not have to worry about Royal back there in that sense.
by donbok1 on Jan 3, 2009 3:30 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Great stuff, ECB
Particularly notable:
I have to say that I noticed what certainly appeared to be a pretty substantial drop off in results from Shanny’s scripted 15 plays to when Bates’ playcalling took over. Also there seemed to be little in the way of halftime adjustments
Excellent point – one of many!
Jim Goodman for Broncos GM!
by Emmett Smith on Jan 3, 2009 3:56 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
The slot receiver point
Wasn’t Royal supposed to help play that slot receiver role out of Va Tech? I recall some people, including myself, on site around draft time saying he could mature into a fine and speedy fill in for the best slot receiver in the league when it comes time for Stokely to retire. Of course Royal also has to work on his hands as well…
by phantom818 on Jan 3, 2009 4:06 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I think we found that Royal...
was too valuable at the #2 position to play back up to Stokes. I thought Royal had exceptional hands all year, except for a couple plays in the last game. Did you see it differently?
by donbok1 on Jan 3, 2009 5:00 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Royal has amazing hands
the whole team should have stayed home for that San Diego gmae. They fought (if you want to call it that), but it wasn’t much of a fight…
Concision in style, precision in thought, decision in life.
by Jeremy Bolander on Jan 3, 2009 5:32 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Nah, I love Royal
Just a little chidding for the San Diego game, that’s all. Not like he was the big reason we lost it anyway though. It’d be nice to work his speed into the slot in some formations, but as far as a full-time “slot guy” goes I can see everyone’s point.
by phantom818 on Jan 3, 2009 5:43 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Great questions! And rec'd
1) QB / Bates
I’m on record as not being a Bates fan. I would prefer that Bates stick with QB coaching, and allow the offense to get away from the spread, or at least to use the RBs more. (Even when we have a healthy stable, the RBs seem to do nothing more than pass block).
I think we should continue to develop Hackney so long as Hackney stays out of trouble. Still, I wouldn’t have a problem with an older QB that could step in as needed.
2) I am all for keeping the zoneblock. It is so successful that other teams are adopting it, and Denver remains on the cutting edge. Keep in mind that Denver still managed yards with 6th, 7th, and 8th string RBs because of an excellent scheme. A change of system means a major overhaul of the OL, and a loss of years of investment. Also, it remains easier to draft for agile OLmen than big brutes.
3) Turner must, must, must stay. He is so valuable, he should be financialy compensated well enough to prevent him from being promoted or moved to another team. He is too valuable as a RBs coach / scout to allow him to promote. Bell is much better than many fans give him credit for (in my opinion), but is not the answer for next year.
4) Dropped passes
Two points – First, we have learned that Marshall played with a numb arm this year. Second, Jay throws a fast ball akin to Elway’s. He will break some fingers. Jay’s continuing progression means he needs to learn to put a fine touch on some passes. Here again, his lack of protection at Vandy developed his need to rifle many passes, and this will change with patience and coaching.
5) TE
I like both Mustard and Jackson (in that order). Still, the team will need a TE down the road, given Graham’s age and Scheff’s injuries. Mustard and Jackson are excellent as #2 TEs, but we’ll eventualy want another #1.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Jan 3, 2009 2:45 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
Thanks, Professor
I’m on record as not being a Bates fan. I would prefer that Bates stick with QB coaching, and allow the offense to get away from the spread, or at least to use the RBs more.
Coupled with ECB’s point regarding the dropoff of play calling after the scripted 15, I think that covers my biggest concerns with the pass game – when to use it, when and where to run. Bates is very young. It times, it shows.
Jay’s continuing progression means he needs to learn to put a fine touch on some passes. Here again, his lack of protection at Vandy developed his need to rifle many passes, and this will change with patience and coaching.
Makes a lot of sense. I’d be less concerned if it wasn’t for Royal having so many drops when he’s wide, staring open, but I recall Elway’s receivers having the same problem.
If the info being put out is accurate, I believe that Marshall’s hand will continue to improve and we’ll see his best game next year. We’ll need it – tough sched.
Jim Goodman for Broncos GM!
by Emmett Smith on Jan 3, 2009 4:13 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
REC, rec, rec.
1) Bates/QB/Spread O = I will keep Bates on the premise that he is quite literally a shooting star. I think the head coaching change will be more than enough instability to “rein” him in a bit. ECB’s observation above about the dropoff from the scripted 15 being indicative of Bates’ ability to adjust to the flow was brilliant, but a caution: there were times this year (and not just the oakland game) when the playcalling was VERY good. Bates suffered through some tough QB times in NY, so it is almost an understandable way for him to gravitate to Cutler’s gifts when the RBs were going down like flies. Also, and I don’t want to even dream of piling on Shanny now that he is gone, but SOMEONE, either Shanny or “Right Hand Rick” should have stepped in and altered the playcalling to not abandon the run. Either way, i am fine with Bates in his current role, even though it is “high risk/high reward”.
2) Zoneblock comes down in my mind to whether or not Rick Dennison goes anywhere. If he stays, we keep it. If he goes, we simply don’t have an offensive coach (except Jeremy bates, believe it or not) who is a student of the system, and who would be able to instruct it at a high enough level to offset the skill with which a new offensive assistant (brought in by the new guy) could teach a new system. All in all, systems change, teams go new directions. If a head coaching change isn’t ripe ground for a system change, what is? Prepare yourselves.
3)
hoosier teacher: Turner must, must, must stay. He is so valuable, he should be financialy compensated well enough to prevent him from being promoted or moved to another team. He is too valuable as a RBs coach / scout to allow him to promote. Bell is much better than many fans give him credit for (in my opinion), but is not the answer for next year.
All I would add is that a new high round RB via the draft is unlikely if the Ostaff stays put, but free agents are a possibility. Where Tatum fits in that puzzle is anyone’s guess. It isn’t unrealistic to picture a Torain, Hillis, Pittman, Alridge, Bell backfield, but who knows?
4) Dropped Passes should not be a long term problem. I agree with Hoosier that the OVERALL problem is more due to Cutler than the receivers, though Marshall has had a few “duh” moments, and when the pressure was on both stokes and Royal had some trouble at the end of the year. I think when there is a less of a desparation attitude around the team, and more confidence, that the number of drops will come down.
5) TE will be greatly affected by the coaching changes on offense. Their current coach is on his first year with them, and seems like a real go getter (pat mcpherson). If he moves on or is promoted or fired, watch that position coach carefully. The key is that we keep bringing in and trying to develop young TEs through the draft, and the position coach is a huge factor in whether that works out or if we have to dip into free agency to cover for injuries or retirements in the next five years.
Concision in style, precision in thought, decision in life.
by Jeremy Bolander on Jan 3, 2009 5:50 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for your thoughts, styg
Greatly appreciated, as always. A general consideration:
The key is that we keep bringing in and trying to develop young TEs through the draft, and the position coach is a huge factor in whether that works out
You bet, and not just TEs. The Goodmans, Jim in particular, have been a gift and I hope that whoever comes in recognizes and lauds their work. Developing depth at all the positions via the draft is a huge key: failing to recognize that is a monstrous factor in the downsides of where we are now. Given what Spags did with one good defensive draft, I’m encouraged (my prejudice is showing).
Jim Goodman for Broncos GM!
by Emmett Smith on Jan 3, 2009 6:01 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
yes, spags
i’m sure bowlen and co. want to keep the o intact as much as possible, but a new oc is a real possibility, especially if we hire an offensive hc. the new hc assistants he brings in, a new gm to the mix, and and i expect bigger change than i originally thought. defensive coaches should all be on notice. special teams, maybe. o should be kept mostly intact. scripted plays may be out, and this was a strength of ours, and the zone-blocking should remain intact. not messing too much with the o has got to be a wise consideration for the new hc. player wise, some young good depth at several mentioned positions seem about right for me, the rest to the d. blitzen!
hear me, perpetrators of bread crime, your punishment is at hand.
taste my blintzkrieg!
all i want for xmas is blitzen.
by davecheffy on Jan 4, 2009 7:48 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
Everything is supposition
The new head coach will decide where this team is going and who he will use in His coaching structure! End of story.
by metalman5050 on Jan 4, 2009 8:11 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
Of course
But given the history of the people on this site, a great deal of this is more analysis than supposition, and much of that is some pretty good wisdom.
Jim Goodman for Broncos GM!
by Emmett Smith on Jan 4, 2009 8:15 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
Blame greek?
I blame rich tuten (strength coach) for our injury woes. Blaming greek is like blaming a doctor for someone getting a gunshot wound during a botched drug deal.
1) Bates – I tend to want to keep him b/c it will appease cutler. I would me more into keeping him if McDaniels comes in v. Spags. If Spags comes in, I will be afraid that Bates will be given more exclusive control – which he shouldn’t. If it’s McDaniels, he’ll mold the offense and Bates will follow suit.
2) Zone blocking – it should stay. If it doesn’t, it will be unfortunate / the end of an era.
3) RBs – I love the guys we have. However, I think getting a feature back isn’t a bad idea. Torain is and always has been injury prone. Hillis could be an h/back and short yardage tailback but I’m not sure he should be an everydown back. I love his versatility, but a feature tailback like Shon Green (Iowa) would make our offense more effective.
4) Drops – don’t worry. Cutler, Eddie, Marshall and Tony will have a little pow wow over the summer and it will get fixed. I’m a little worried that Marshall’s numbness etc. will be irreversible. If so, that will suck. If not, he should be fine.
5) TE/WR – Getting a new TE or WR in the 4th or 5th – maybe. But we shouldn’t go high for a Chase Coffman type, especially if Nate will be back for next year.
by GJcontingent-rAd on Jan 4, 2009 10:39 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
Tuten
Apparently, word came out from Dove Valley that Tuten’s job is safe. If so, I hope they get a stretching coach. This is getting out of hand.
Jim Goodman for Broncos GM!
by Emmett Smith on Jan 5, 2009 12:33 AM MST reply actions 0 recs

by 


























