Do the Broncos commit to the option? Or go back to the norm?

by Lt. Philip Nolan on Jan 16, 2012 12:37 PM MST

Today marks the start of the off season for the Broncos, and along with the draft, free agency, and camps/workouts, there seems (to me at least) to be a fairly big question looming: in what direction does the Broncos' offense go?

There are two clear options here. They can either commit to the spread option, and begin building a team meant for it. Or they can fall back to the "normal" NFL offense, and see what Tebow can do with a full off season of learning that type of system. Let's cover both:

If the front office and coaching staff chooses to stick with the spread option, not only can it work, but they are already around halfway to having a team worthy enough to use it to compete. Tebow is already ingrained into the offense, and would more of less only need to focus on his confidence in his arm, his mechanics, and choosing when to run vs. when to pass. Of course, this would mean that Quinn and Weber may no longer be the backup QB's, and the team would have to either find a QB or two that could run this offense in free agency, or draft one that is capable of it as well. They would be able to look at guys like (gulp) Vince Young or Pat White, or could draft someone like Russell Wilson from Wisconsin or Darron Thomas from Oregon (I am assuming here that Robert Griffin III will already be off the board). There is no sense in having a pro-style backup QB behind a spread option starter. Also, as far as this offense is concerned, the team would be fairly set at RB, with Willis McGahee more than likely having one or two good years left in him, backed up by Knowshon, Lance Ball, and Jeremiah Johnson. The wide receiver position also would need very little work, only needing to find a few more guys in case some combination of Royal/Decker/Thomas gets hurt. The offensive line was good, albeit young, and could benefit from a bit of depth, most likely by free agency or a late round draft pick. The OL all but disappeared in the Patriots game, but losing the top two centers on the depth chart to injury certainly helped that along. The defensive side of the ball needs the most work. The line was mostly patchwork with veterans and current Broncos, the safety position was both aging and brand new, and the backfield is more or less in shambles. Champ Bailey is well past his prime, and he isn't getting any younger. The team definitely needs more consistent pass defense to stay competitive. The line could use some young blood from the draft. Safety is a bit of a different story, as Quinton Carter is a very promising young player, but we will need some reliable help to provide some insurance, and Dawkins is getting a bit on the older side. Linebacker is where the strength of the defense is right now without question. Dumervil and MIller are quickly becoming one of the leagues best pass rushing tandems, and Ayers/Mays can provide good MLB help. Drafting here would not be a bad idea, perhaps looking at someone like Vontaze Burfict out of Arizona State, Sean Spence out of Miami, or Luke Keuchly from Boston College. All told, sticking with the option is a great choice here, but it would require that everyone involved be on board 100%.

The other option is a bit more tricky. If the team decides to try and return to a more traditional offense, it throws numerous wrenches into the machine. First off, you would be taking everything Tebow has done this season as the starter and throwing it out the window. He would have the full off season to try and learn a pro-style offense, but it would be basically starting from scratch. It would be easier to find more reliable and serviceable backups in this case, but that would be hedging your bets on Tebow being able to produce in this style of offense. As far as the personnel is concerned, the offensive line would need a bit of tweaking, as they were more geared towards run blocking instead of pass protection. The wide receivers would need more work as well, as you would need more of a down field threat to complement Thomas. On the defensive side, the same issues are there. The backfield needs a lot of work, the D-line does as well. To me, this option would require way more than one off season to conform to, so you would be more or less taking a fairly productive playoff season and going back to the drawing board. This choice would be better suited had the spread option not worked as well as it did.

If I had my choice as a fan, I would say stick to what worked. Stick to what got you to the playoffs after starting 1-5. Stick to what led you to being the top rushing offense in the league. Build your defense, and put players around Tebow so that he will succeed. What do you guys think?

Go Broncos!

This is a Fan-Created Comment on MileHighReport.com. The opinion here is not necessarily shared by the editorial staff of MHR

Tweet Comment 35 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Hopefully they keep it so defenses have to prepare for it

Just another trick in the bag

TurfSharks.com

by ElwayFanJ on Jan 16, 2012 12:49 PM MST reply actions

I say let Tebow let the pro offense

he has shown flashes plus remember what happened to the Dolphins with the wildcat??? Great season, Broncos fans, and good luck

by RaiderPride20 on Jan 16, 2012 12:53 PM MST reply actions

Oddly enough I think you guys are on the right track

Too bad you’re stuck with Carson Palmer

TurfSharks.com

by ElwayFanJ on Jan 16, 2012 12:57 PM MST up reply actions

and no draft picks!

Davis and Smith to the Hall!

"Teamwork divides the task and double the success."
- Unknown

by Jon Tollerud on Jan 16, 2012 1:10 PM MST up reply actions

Well Palmer was not the problem

When the D gave up an avarage of 37 points in every one of Palmer’s losses, something’s wrong and it isnt the offense, plus, 9 of Palmers pics when when we were down by more than 17, so really, he was trying to make something happen, he has played well

by RaiderPride20 on Jan 16, 2012 1:22 PM MST up reply actions

Continuity

Sorry to hear you guys lost your head coach. Don’t get me wrong, I despise the Raiders on a subatomic level, :-) but I liked what I saw in Hue. He was an emotional leader and really got his team motivated to play. The Broncos have had their own problems with the big C word (no guys not the word we call McD) and we know first-hand the havoc it can wreak on a team. Hope Davis Jr. gets his act together and that you make the playoffs next year…as one of the wildcards of course :-)

Quotes from my wife (2nd yr football fan) while watching the Broncos with me:
"Honey I know we are losing and you are upset but remember things could be worse. You could be cheering for the Raiders."
"THAT hit [Rahim on Jones] got a flag? What?!?! AND a FINE?!?! Why not just strap pillows to their heads and have a tea party on the 50 yard line since that's as much contact as the NFL will allow."

by DominantDenverDefense on Jan 16, 2012 1:26 PM MST up reply actions

Can not tell you

how happy it makes me every time I see this lol

by DominantDenverDefense on Jan 16, 2012 1:27 PM MST up reply actions

i wouldn't get any more involved with it.

i’d rather they keep moving away from option stuff and get more towards a pro style that suits tebow: boots and play action, an occasional called QB run, etc. i wouldn’t get rid of it though, either. it’s a great thing for opposing teams to have to waste time preparing for and if they don’t we can surprise them.

by oxmouth on Jan 16, 2012 12:56 PM MST reply actions 1 recs

Nicely put Ox

I love me some bootleg passes with the option for Tebow to tuck and run if no one is open. we know he can roll left and throw it like a champ…he needs to work on throwing on the run to his right. I know he will get better by next season. We need a screen game as well…WR screens, TE screens, and RB screens. When the defense gets agressive, a few screens a game will back them off and open up other plays. I’d like to see the playbook expanded DRAMATICALLY next season. I want to see ys do a LOT of different things that defenses have to plan for. We need to get some explosive players via FA and the draft to make this happen. PSYCHED FOR THIS YEAR!!!

by DominantDenverDefense on Jan 16, 2012 1:22 PM MST up reply actions

the issue here is whether or not Fox will adopt these into his playbook.

He isnt known for using TE’s as receivers, preferring them to be blockers with the occasional pass. If my memory serves, hes not too much into screens either.

I AM BECOME JC001, THE DESTROYER OF BOARDS
"Always the corn, never the hole"
Ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Conway Tweety
Editor for The 7th Floor

by Lt. Philip Nolan on Jan 16, 2012 1:31 PM MST up reply actions

the real question is will the spread option work next year

My guess is that it won’t if its our base offense rather than just an occasional bag of tricks. A lot of our success this year is not repeatable. 4th Q comeback drives? A QB who was never remotely injured despite running and pretty poor pass protection (an 11% sack rate -twice the league average – is a long-term QB killer)? A league that took multiple games to figure out what Denver was doing? I don’t think its an accident that our W-L record went from 1-4 to 7-1 to 1-4. Those last four games are unfortunately more representative of what our record will likely be going forward if we stick with the spread. The NFL gets it now – they have game tape – and they now have a full offseason to prep for it knowing that Tebow is our starter.

I think we are going to keep boosting our defense first. And boosting the stuff on offense that is needed regardless – an extra RB, a replacement WR, and one more O-line guy for pass protection.

by yibberat on Jan 16, 2012 12:58 PM MST reply actions

Its hard to make a judgement on whether or not the spread option will work

based on this year. For it to be effective the way it is meant to, you have to have a consistent passing attack along with the run. Due to Tebow’s limitations and learning curve, the passing game was not effective enough to really make the option a viable thing. Once teams realized that he wasnt going to have a good day passing, they could load the box, stop the run, and play somewhat competent pass defense, and the offense shut down. If Tebow (or someone else) can come in and provide a consistent passing game to back up the run option, then this offense can definitely succeed in the NFL. its not fair to compare it to the wildcat, because most teams who ran that tried using a running back rather than a QB who could also run. think about it this way: the steelers were the leagues best defense, and Tebow gashed them passing because they were daring him to by stopping the run. Against the Pats, the run worked almost whenever they wanted it to, but the passing game couldnt back it up all game, so it made the offense one dimensional. Games like the one against the steelers are what you need to look at, because thats how the offense is supposed to run every time out. if Tebow gets more comfortable/consistent, and the O Line stays relatively free from injury, i see no reason why this offense wont be able to work.

I AM BECOME JC001, THE DESTROYER OF BOARDS
"Always the corn, never the hole"
Ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Conway Tweety
Editor for The 7th Floor

by Lt. Philip Nolan on Jan 16, 2012 1:04 PM MST up reply actions

The Steelers game won't repeat a success pattern

On offense we had one drive of 12 plays (FG), one of 8 (FG), one of 7(Punt). That’s 6 points scored on methodical drives – ie drives where we can control the game. The rest was home-run ball that worked because the Steelers DARED us to play home-run ball.

by yibberat on Jan 16, 2012 1:14 PM MST up reply actions

except for that homerun ball accounted for 80 of tebows 316 yards passing.

my point was not that every game will look like that, my point was that is the game to look at the spread option and see how it is supposed to work when both run and pass work together. not to mention the spread option is built for that sort of game, run the ball 80% of the time, and hope for medium range passes and one or two big plays. the issue was the Tebow was neither confident enough or accurate enough to make most of his throws, and when he didnt throw he was instinctively going run first or holding the ball too long.

this thing can work, because defenses either have to play man D, which the run game can exploit, or if they play zone mid-range passes as well as the run can beat that as well. its not like the wild cat which relys solely on running the ball, because in that offense all the D has to do is key in on 1-3 potential runners and its basically stopped. the reason we dont see the option is because everyone assumes it cant work. well, something worked right, because the broncos made the playoffs and won 6 in a row (albeit with some help along the way), and whenever the team struggled its easy to see why based on the stat line.

I AM BECOME JC001, THE DESTROYER OF BOARDS
"Always the corn, never the hole"
Ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Conway Tweety
Editor for The 7th Floor

by Lt. Philip Nolan on Jan 16, 2012 1:21 PM MST up reply actions

homerun ball was not just the OT pass

by yibberat on Jan 16, 2012 1:22 PM MST up reply actions

My point re the long drives

is that we need to boost our offense so that we can score TD’s in those drives. The red zone stuff that every offense in the league needs.

On the other side of the ball in that game. PIT had a 12 play drive (FG), an 11 play (TD), and three 7 play drives (FG, TD, clock expired)

by yibberat on Jan 16, 2012 1:22 PM MST up reply actions

again, your concentrating on the stats in that one game.

i was merely using it as an example on how the spread option is supposed to work. the game against KC? thats not how its supposed to go, and without marked improvement, im afraid thats how a pro-style offense with Tebow would look like. his motion is too long for a normal 3, 5 or 7 step drop offense. but put him in an offense where the play action buys him time or the defense not knowing whats coming next buys him time, he’s able to find receivers and get the ball out effectively (assuming he improves his accuracy)

the main issue with saying the spread option cant work is the unknown factor. no one ones it, therefore everyone assumes it will end up like the wildcat. But if you sit and look at the games where Tebow threw like a QB should, and think about how it confuses the defense, no matter how much they prepare, you start to see how it actually would be a viable offense long term. but the team and everyone involved must buy into it.

I AM BECOME JC001, THE DESTROYER OF BOARDS
"Always the corn, never the hole"
Ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Conway Tweety
Editor for The 7th Floor

by Lt. Philip Nolan on Jan 16, 2012 1:29 PM MST up reply actions

And you are concentrating on the early games when

no one know what Denver was doing. Those games are OVER. They ended five games ago. And our record in the last five games is 1-4. You may think we did something “right” in that one game that will surprise everybody going forward. I can assure you that every other team in the NFL is NOT going to repeat the Steelers hubris. and our success in that game is not repeatable against a team less arrogant than the Steelers were in that one. And certainly the Steelers themselves won’t make that mistake twice.

by yibberat on Jan 16, 2012 1:33 PM MST up reply actions

Its a bit unfair to blame those last 3 games on the fact we ran the spread option.

it couldnt be further from the reason. the first Pats game was mainly due to costly turnovers and the defense not being able to stop Brady and his squad, which admittedly is a tall order for anyone with the way they have been playing late. but the Buffalo game and the KC game were not losses because they somehow figured out the option. they were losses squarely because they held the running game in check, and Tebow played horribly. which only helps my point. take the buffalo game, for example. Tebows stat line: 13-30 185 yds, 4 picks. his inconsistency as a passer meant that all buffalo had to do was key in on the run, and they stood a great chance at winning. Had tebow played better, that game might have turned out differently. then the KC game. they didnt do anything groundbreaking here either, they held the run in check, and Tebow was ineffective: 6-22 for 60 yards, 1 int, 1 fumble. This game certainly would have been different had Tebow played well, and its right there on tape. When they ran the flea flicker, Tebow has Decker wide open behind the defense, but was too rattled after throwing 4 picks the week before that he didnt even make an attempt to throw. instead, he saw decker, and chose to try and run once the protection broke down.

If Tebow can get consistent, and have faith in throwing the ball game in and game out, theres no reason the option cant work. the points you are making are based just as much on guessing as mine are. even if teams dont repeat the steelers “hubris”, there are plenty of other game tapes that show that this is a very viable offense, as long as we get consistent play from both the run and the pass. without that, it doesnt work.

I AM BECOME JC001, THE DESTROYER OF BOARDS
"Always the corn, never the hole"
Ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Conway Tweety
Editor for The 7th Floor

by Lt. Philip Nolan on Jan 16, 2012 1:44 PM MST up reply actions

Fine

The last four losses mean absolutely nothing at all. No team in the NFL will look at the game tape from them to find out what worked. Instead they will watch game tape of Tebow succeeding and try to reinvent the wheel.

I think it is far more likely that Tebow will improve his skills in a normal offense – so that a normal offense can work – than it is that Denver will come up with a perpetual motion bag of new tricks/gimmicks that will perpetually bamboozle the NFL forever. Yes that is just a guess on my part. But it makes a huge difference, as you acknowledge in your post. Because there are only 24 hours in a day and 53 players on an NFL roster. Which means Denver is going to need to focus on one or the other. It can’t do both.

by yibberat on Jan 16, 2012 2:25 PM MST up reply actions

I disagree.

They absolutely can do both. The plays are already installed and the team is the same. Introducing massive new concepts to guys that have never seen it is challenging (and I think Fox wanted to avoid it, but Orton forced his hand). Using a set of plays that provides a particular advantage to your benefit is something we SHOULD do. We have a unique skill set and we should use it. Tim will get better at the passing game. The O-line will get better at the pass protections. Scary as it is, the O-line will also get better blocking the read option. Part of why it failed recently was execution as well. I agree that we caught some people by surprise. Guess what, I am sure Brady and Co. caught some of our guys by surprise too and there were PLENTY of tape on them. No offense is stagnant week in and week out. You install plays that your guys run well and work on the areas that they don’t (so you can give a team a little surprise, when they think they have it all figured out…

by Da Bum on Jan 16, 2012 4:05 PM MST up reply actions

We will have to agree to disagree

I don’t think either the Broncos or Tebow will be successful if that success will basically depend on reinventing the game of NFL football. It’s one thing to have a few plays designed for a unique skill set. Whole nuther animal to design an entire offense around a unique skill set.

by yibberat on Jan 16, 2012 4:21 PM MST up reply actions

In particular to depend 100% on one player

by yibberat on Jan 16, 2012 4:22 PM MST up reply actions

Well

then I don’t think we completely disagree. It sounds like you are making it black or white above. I am saying that we can and SHOULD continue to install these plays into the playbook as long as we have guys that can run them. I definitely do not think this is ALL that is in the playbook. I said that I think we need BOTH and that we CAN do both. We need to run some of these plays a few times a game to keep the other D honest. If they fail to defend it properly… wham, we keep running it over and over and trod them to death. If they demonstrate proper preparation… we run other things. This is not unlike any “traditional” offense. The good ones attack specific areas of the defense and if defended, do something else. The only real difference is the focus of those particular plays… to get an advantage of bodies in the run game by letting your QB participate. We want to do that because our QB can be effective doing it (which not every QB can… imaging Tom Brady running that…). One dimensional, even extreme passing, can be shut down. It is never good to be one dimensional. However, if you have a bunch of young, inconsistent guys and you have to choose one dimension over another… running is usually a much safer bet.

by Da Bum on Jan 16, 2012 5:15 PM MST up reply actions

Why? Because NFL never progressed from 3 yarsd and a cloud of dust?

Because Air Coryell and West Coast Offense were never successful? Big cataclysmic changes are possible in this league. The latest one is defense-unnecessary shotgun spread that some of the best teams are runnig quite a bit. We may create our own system, too.

by si_ice on Jan 16, 2012 6:52 PM MST up reply actions

I wouldn't agree that the defense's strength is our LB corps.

I would say we have a solid SLB and a solid LDE, but that’s about it. Mays has been atrocious this season minus a few well-timed hits, and while Ayers has shown flashes of potential late this season, he still doesn’t live up to the first round pick spent on him. DJ is quietly having a very strong season, but for him to really excel, I think a vocal leader is needed between him and Von.

Also, I’m not sure why Mays/Ayers would be MLB? Ayers is RDE, maybe OLB in a 3-4, but not in our current scheme.

I would say the strength has been a combination of our front seven, with certain people picking up some slack in a “give-and-take” type of situation; i.e. Miller bringing the edge rush for the days Ayers just can’t get the pressure on; DJ filling gaps for missed assignments by Thomas or McBean; Carter picking up some of the slack from Goody, etc.

I think our system has masked a few of our weaknesses, and one of those weaknesses is a solid leader and defensive captain. We saw the impact that Dawk had when he was in the game — I don’t think that was attributed solely to his play making skills, but his ability to recognize plays, call defensive assignments on the fly, and audible based on offensive packages. There isn’t a single person with that skill set on the defensive side of the ball, except maybe Champ.

I also think that our DL and LB crew are only maybe one player away from being solid – a versatile MLB and a pass-rushing interior lineman could quickly and easily create a formidable defensive front.

by H-bizzle on Jan 16, 2012 1:52 PM MST reply actions

This has never been an "option offense"

It’s just a series of plays we run sometimes to keep a team off-balance. We actually have been executing it horrendously bad – which happens when your OC, offensive line, and skill players have never done it before. I’m expecting they refine it in the offseason and it remains a complimentary part of the offense.

by scooter17 on Jan 16, 2012 2:41 PM MST reply actions

You are right on there

There were less and less option looks the further the season went on and the execution was spotty at times. Using Royal as the pitch man rarely worked. I think the option stays as a package of plays, a security blanket of sorts, but not the basis for the whole offense. Tebow is not going to grow as a QB unless he stretches his comfort zone, that means getting away from the spread option.

"You’re only great if you win something. I mean, Alexander wasn’t Alexander the Mediocre or Alexander the Average. He was Alexander the Great, and there’s a reason for it."-Shannon Sharpe

by CH74 on Jan 16, 2012 3:28 PM MST up reply actions

Can Rick Dennison be an option?

I woud love nothing more than to go back to Mike Shanhan’s offense. His offense was really never an issue. It was usually a top 5 offense. Also it would benefit everyone on the broncos today. Tebow can still be protected by the run game. He can still move outside the pocket. You think that would be a no brainer, since he’s better throws are when on the run and the bootleg action allows him to do that. At the sametime, still take shots down field, but would still give Tebow the option of running with it. Clady/Kuper had their best years in that offense. Beadles would benefit the most on the o-line. Don’t really need an athletic TE—though it would be a plus. I also think Thomas and Decker would excell in that kind of offense. It would be like the old days again. The Texans have shown is still clearly works. John Elway should show John Fox clips of the 2005 season as well as the 97/98 season.

by tiderfootball09 on Jan 16, 2012 3:22 PM MST reply actions

The best years we had running that offense

Were when Kubiak was calling the plays. I think McGahee would be a beast behind that full on zone blocking scheme. The big limitations right now would be Tebow’s inability to throw accurately while moving to his right and selling the play action fake. Shanny’s offense is not as potent without a good pass catching Tight End. Even after Shannon Sharpe, the Tight End played a large role. Scheffler would have been huge had Shanny still been around. Look at what they did with Jeb Putzier? Julius Thomas could figure in there if he develops like most expected before the season.

"You’re only great if you win something. I mean, Alexander wasn’t Alexander the Mediocre or Alexander the Average. He was Alexander the Great, and there’s a reason for it."-Shannon Sharpe

by CH74 on Jan 16, 2012 3:42 PM MST up reply actions

See I think they would just reverse that and go to the left. I do agree about Thomas though, good point.

by tiderfootball09 on Jan 16, 2012 5:46 PM MST up reply actions

My point there

Is that if Tebow could throw well moving to his left and his right, it would open up a lot more possibilities in that offense. Both Elway and Plummer rolled out and ran bootlegs to the left and the right in that offense.

"You’re only great if you win something. I mean, Alexander wasn’t Alexander the Mediocre or Alexander the Average. He was Alexander the Great, and there’s a reason for it."-Shannon Sharpe

by CH74 on Jan 17, 2012 9:42 AM MST up reply actions

I think your putting the cart-before-the-horse here concerning Tebow...

John Elway made it pretty plain that Tebow will have to become a pocket passer at some point and I believe him. Tim will undergo a total make-over during the offseason there is no doubt about it, drafting an ‘option’ style quarterback isn’t the option. Tim Tebow will be a pro-style quarterback who uses the spread-option when called just like any other quarterback that holds salt. Brady uses it quite often if you haven’t noticed. And Tebow has been using a prostyle offense too, but the media and their vicious lies keep trying to make people stupid with their Tebow rants. When Tebow develops his pocket awareness he will give opposing OCs nightmares. Just wait and see…

Win, lose or draw, we are the Denver Broncos! 13-3 Baby!!! Until we ain't!

Follow @bfree2bronc

by bfree2bronc on Jan 16, 2012 4:59 PM MST reply actions

Keep the option

in the bag of tricks, not the basis for the offense. We make the defenses prepare for it special since it isn’t too common. HOWEVER, it needs to be used only at unpredictable times. We need an unpredictable offense and used correctly, the option could help us be more unpredictable.

by SD guy on Jan 16, 2012 6:07 PM MST reply actions

I think they should keep it in the arsenal but not use it nearly as much.

I think they should use a combination of conventional plays as well as a variety of spread type plays. Tebow is much better out of the shotgun and so a large package of those plays should be included in our playbook as well. I don’t think it has to be one or the other.

We will become a much more dangerous offense if Tebow is able to master both and we can use plays from each at will.

Tim Tebow wears 3WM and drinks Tuscan whole milk.

by BroncoMath101 on Jan 16, 2012 9:43 PM MST reply actions