Horse Tracks 2/21/09
DP - At the Combine, Josh McDaniels talked about the free agency budget and the 3-4.
RMN - Captain Obvious, Part 2. After much research, the Rocky has determined that the Draft will be important for the Broncos' future success on defense.
RMN - McDaniels was consulted on the decision to promote Brian Xanders to GM.
RMN - Jarvis Moss will be switching to outside linebacker for Mike Nolan. See the notes to the left for updates on Casey Wiegmann and Kenny Peterson.
RMN - Boss Bailey's rehabilitation is going well.
RMN - Tony Scheffler needs to avoid those late-night buffets.
Captain Obvious, Part 3. The top priority for Kubes in Houston is fixing the "D".
0 recs |
9 comments
Comments
more indications
I could be accused of reading between the lines too much but even the occasional cryptic comment speaks volumes to me. The latest comment by McDaniels merely confirms what we’ve been speculating:
“You’re going to see some 3-4 from us,” McDaniels said. “I’m not going to say we’re going to be all 3-4, but it’s going to be some combination thereof.”
by Colinski on Feb 21, 2009 12:31 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
I heard it exactly the same way
I clearer confirmation I don’t think we can rightfully imagine, especially from an NFL coach. In fact, it may just be the fact that he has worn the HC cap for such a short time that we have even gotten this much, considering the tree he fell from…I hope not, because I have enjoyed hearing his descriptions of players and situations that they will be pursuing, especially now when we have so little to go on.
I thought his introductory press conference when he was first hired was a typical example of coach speak, and I have been surprised about how much more “open” (can I use the term to refer to microscopic increments?) he has actually been. The difference may be that he actually has something to talk about now, instead of trying to answer questions he hasn’t had a chance to look into himself yet.
On the subject of questions, did anyone else feel like the questions asked by the reporters at the combine were pretty below par? Not to continue to fruitlessly rail on the MSM, but you have a rookie head coach, he’s willing to talk, he’s at the combine with visions of sugar plums and all that, I was really hoping for more insightful questions, and less fluff. One of the questions was “Did the cuts reflect personnell issues or economic issues?” Are you kidding me? Ignoring the fact that they can rightly be considered the same idea, so intimately intertwined are they, but the answer is an easy “Yes.”
I hope I didn’t just make Guru feel bad for not going… He may have had the PERFECT question for McDaniels! You know, the one that creates a Youtube sensation… ;)
Concision in style, precision in thought, decision in life.
by Jeremy Bolander on Feb 21, 2009 1:06 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
shame on me
there was actually two good questions towards the end, relating to 3-4 defense, and Coach Jedi gave decent answers to both.
Concision in style, precision in thought, decision in life.
by Jeremy Bolander on Feb 21, 2009 1:08 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
they're under Fair Use Doctrine, so here they are.....
http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=334&storyID=8853
(on what makes the 3-4 defense difficult to play against)
The 3-4, and to answer your question, you’re going to see some 3-4 from us. I’m not going to say we’re going to be all 3-4, but it’s going to some combination there of, but I think the 34 defense presents some unique challenges to an offense. Without getting too technical, there are some bigger bodies out there that you have to decide how to block them properly both in the running game in the protection in the passing game, and with certain teams that play against a 4-3 all training camp long and then all of a sudden get in there and play against a 34 in the season, that can be difficult, and vice versa. I know in New England we’ve always practiced against a 3-4 during training camp, and then you get to a 4-3 team, and it’s like, ‘Wait a minute, they’re not supposed to line up like this.’ It just gives some more balanced rushes. You never feel like you’re out of whack in terms of the rotation. You don’t have to do certain things based on the formations the offense lines up in because you’re pretty much balanced. When you cut it right down the middle, it is what it is. There’s as guys on this side as there are on that side, and it gives you more flexibility. The challenge is finding the players that fit really well in it, and that’s what we’re after. That will be ongoing from this point forward.
(on how long it takes to develop the 3-4)
I don’t think there’s a timeline on it. It could be quicker or it could be a little longer into the future. We gave up 450 points last year doing it one way, and I think the goal is to get something in place that’s going to be consistent, and we can adapt to it, and we can adapt to it based on the players we have in the system. We’re not going to tie our hands and do one thing or the other. Whatever we have and whatever we feel best about when we get to September, that’s what we’ll play on defense. And it’s going to be the same way on offense, the same way in the kicking game, because to me, that’s the way you win. You don’t win by saying this is what we do, and no changing. Because if you don’t change in this league, somebody will figure out a way to beat you doing what you think is best if you’re never going to move. We’re going to make moves and try to get people in we feel can handle our system the best, and then we’re going to adapt as we go and try to be as competitive as we can once September hits.
by Colinski on Feb 21, 2009 7:27 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
re: Gibril Wilson
It’s news that made me take notice. The problem is his contract. How do you get someone to settle for less once they’ve been over-paid?
by Colinski on Feb 21, 2009 12:34 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
Being fired (excuse me, cut)...
sometimes encourages players to do that.
by SlowWhiteGuy on Feb 21, 2009 2:41 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
price stickiness
There are psychological factors involved in getting him to accept a lower wage. Being “released” helps (a vested vet is released while a non-vested player is waived, as we found out when Samie Parker was released), but I wouldn’t want to be the position of selling that idea to his agent. Vets tend to make more money regardless of ability, but I don’t know if there is a formal mechanism that produces this or if it’s merely a consequence of sticking around longer, and thus climbing the salary ladder.
My point is that it’s hard to get the price drop that we’re probably looking for if the player has any real value, for various reasons. At least he expands the FA Safety pool and lessens demand.
by Colinski on Feb 21, 2009 6:47 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I understand price stickiness and it is an issue...
but with players who have been cut you can often induce them into incentive laden contracts versus the guaranteed money contracts you typically pay FAs. That way you pay for performance. D-Rob’s contract was a good example. In the end, the Broncos didn’t overpay because he didn’t perform. That can be accomplished through incentive bonuses, signing bonuses, etc.
And he he still won’t budge, let someone else overpay for his services. Salary cap almost makes personnel decisions almost a zero-sum game.
by SlowWhiteGuy on Feb 22, 2009 2:06 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I sure hope so
Not that he’s a great player, but he racks up lots of tackles. That’s gotta count for something. He also doesn’t have stone hands. These are a couple of traits the Broncos have been missing at S for quite awhile now…
by Douglas A. Lee on Feb 21, 2009 2:54 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

by 






















