PDA

View Full Version : Ryan Torain RB ASU 5th Rd Pick



Pages : [1] 2 3 4

Scarface
04-27-2008, 02:01 PM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2008/draft/players/47985.html

RB
Class:
Sr
School:
Arizona State
Conference:
Pac-10
Ht., Wt.:
6-0.5, 222


BIOGRAPHY: Junior-college transfer who totaled 110/553/5 on the ground as a senior while adding seven receptions. Played in six games last year before fracturing his toe, which required season-ending surgery to repair. Junior-year totals included 223/1229/7.

POSITIVES: Nice-sized straight-line runner who could end up as one of the hidden gems in this draft. Plays with an aggressive style, doles out punishment, and runs over defenders to pick up yardage off initial contact. Finds the running lanes, quick through the hole, and falls forward when tackled. Patient, waits for blocks to develop, and runs with authority. Effectively picks up the blitz and gets results blocking.

NEGATIVES: Not a creative or elusive runner. Possesses marginal playing speed and cannot turn the corner. Average pass-catcher out of the backfield.

ANALYSIS: Torain was expected to turn in a big senior campaign, but an injury put him on the sidelines. He possesses the size and skill to be a strong interior runner at the next level. He could be a fine complement to a feature back on a roster.

PROJECTION: Middle Sixth Round

http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff302/ScarfaceBroncos2007/NFL%20Draft%2008/RB/qwj4ctoc.jpg
http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff302/ScarfaceBroncos2007/NFL%20Draft%2008/RB/477747.jpg

lex
04-27-2008, 02:05 PM
This was a horrible pick. We could have taken him later or signed him as a UFA...or someone like him. This bargain basement running back crap sucks.

SmilinAssasSin27
04-27-2008, 02:06 PM
The only pick I am actually against. Injured in JuCo as well as multiple injuries at ASU. We already have 3 RBs who have injury concerns.

DenBronx
04-27-2008, 02:10 PM
we could of had tashard choice with the late 4th round pick. instead the cowboys take him a few spots later. why did the cowboys pick up another rb when they drafted felix jones in round 1 and already have barber? i'll tell you why....because choice has heart and is going to be a damn good football player in the nfl.

another missed oportunity by the broncos. :tsk:

i too am getting tired of second rate and lower tiered players. this diamond in the ruff stuff has got to end. the broncos seriously need to find a gm.....fast!

r8rh8r
04-27-2008, 02:10 PM
Agreed. Terrible pick. There are at least 2 RB's I liked better than Torain here. He'll be listed at fullback by 2009 and really he's just a short-yardage option to try and overcome our horrible power success percentage and red zone efficiency.

DenBronx
04-27-2008, 02:15 PM
Agreed. Terrible pick. There are at least 2 RB's I liked better than Torain here. He'll be listed at fullback by 2009 and really he's just a short-yardage option to try and overcome our horrible power success percentage and red zone efficiency.

this is mike bell part 2....torain almost runs a 4.7.

im scratching my head on every single pick since the 1st round. lots of really good players went out the window.

powell and that lightsaber dude i guess are ok choices....but damn....i wonder if sunquist should have stayed at least through the draft.

r8rh8r
04-27-2008, 02:18 PM
this is mike bell part 2....torain almost runs a 4.7.

im scratching my head on every single pick since the 1st round. lots of really good players went out the window.

I think he just gives Denver a pile driver for a year or two. After Henry's wheels fall off (which they may have done so already), then what? This is a stopgap pick. Bad strategy.

DenBronx
04-27-2008, 02:23 PM
Ryan Torain
http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k272/DenBronx/1996.jpg

Mike Bell
http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k272/DenBronx/8008.jpg

Lonestar
04-27-2008, 02:32 PM
we could of had tashard choice with the late 4th round pick. instead the cowboys take him a few spots later. why did the cowboys pick up another rb when they drafted felix jones in round 1 and already have barber? i'll tell you why....because choice has heart and is going to be a damn good football player in the nfl.

another missed oportunity by the broncos. :tsk:

i too am getting tired of second rate and lower tiered players. this diamond in the ruff stuff has got to end. the broncos seriously need to find a gm.....fast!


mikey has TD syndrome thinking he can make HOF players out of 5-6 round choices..

Your correct we need a TRUE Professional GM in the worst way..

Enough of this we will build our coaching and scouting teams from within.. All under the tutelage of mikey.. while he has been a great coach or at least was one during the Superbowl years. I do not think anyone fears his teams any longer.. SAN certainly does not any longer..

SmilinAssasSin27
04-27-2008, 02:33 PM
I'm gonna hope that he is short yardage and goalline terror and he doesn't have to be healthy or fast for his 3-5 carries per game.

Scarface
04-27-2008, 02:34 PM
Compares To: MIKE ANDERSON-ex-Baltimore...Like Anderson, Torain can get the tough yardage in between the tackles or in short-yardage situations. He is a physical runner with adequate speed, but lacks the burst or elusiveness to break free in the open field. He shows good vision attacking the holes and patience following his blockers, but is strictly a one-cut runner with marginal hip wiggle. He is never used on complicated pass routes, as he doesn't have the skills to look the ball in over his head, but shows decent pass catching ability for dump-offs. His blocking technique needs complete refinement, as he gets too wild with his hands to sustain. If your team has a lightning quick back and you are looking for one with a little thunder to complement, Torain might fit that role, but he is not one to build your overall running game around.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/profiles/ryan-torain?id=1996


BTW, it's a little more than comical that anyone is criticizing a Denver Broncos Day 2 RB selection. They've never hit on RBs on Day 2. :laugh:

r8rh8r
04-27-2008, 02:37 PM
Compares To: MIKE ANDERSON-ex-Baltimore...Like Anderson, Torain can get the tough yardage in between the tackles or in short-yardage situations. He is a physical runner with adequate speed, but lacks the burst or elusiveness to break free in the open field. He shows good vision attacking the holes and patience following his blockers, but is strictly a one-cut runner with marginal hip wiggle. He is never used on complicated pass routes, as he doesn't have the skills to look the ball in over his head, but shows decent pass catching ability for dump-offs. His blocking technique needs complete refinement, as he gets too wild with his hands to sustain. If your team has a lightning quick back and you are looking for one with a little thunder to complement, Torain might fit that role, but he is not one to build your overall running game around.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/profiles/ryan-torain?id=1996


BTW, it's a little more than comical that anyone is criticizing a Denver Broncos Day 2 RB selection. They've never hit on RBs on Day 2. :laugh:

Just because Denver has a core competency in selecting RB's doesn't mean we should all blindly start oogling and awing over any player they select. I'd love for Torian to turn into a productive running back. That doesn't change my opinion of him as a 5th-round prospect.

DenBronx
04-27-2008, 02:40 PM
mikey has TD syndrome thinking he can make HOF players out of 5-6 round choices..

Your correct we need a TRUE Professional GM in the worst way..

Enough of this we will build our coaching and scouting teams from within.. All under the tutelage of mikey.. while he has been a great coach or at least was one during the Superbowl years. I do not think anyone fears his teams any longer.. SAN certainly does not any longer..

if we wanted a returning wr, then i think jackson was the guy. if we wanted a pure wr then sweed was the choice. royal may be a decent wr in the college level but the steve smith type players are extremely rare!

we could have easily traded up into the 3rd for a solid dt, lb ect. many teams were willing to trade up or down this year.

the 4th round we go cb when we still havnt picked a solid rb, lb or dt???


so....yeah im pretty pissed this year. its not like we didnt have the extra picks to go get the guy we needed.

we could of had ALL the players in my mock. :tsk:

mclark
04-27-2008, 02:49 PM
Just because Denver has a core competency in selecting RB's doesn't mean we should all blindly start oogling and awing over any player they select. I'd love for Torian to turn into a productive running back. That doesn't change my opinion of him as a 5th-round prospect.

I agree. I hope he's a diamond-in-the-rough, but Ahmad Galloway and Maurice Clarett weren't.

If Torain was the only reach in this draft, then no problem. But we've been reaching since Round Two.

Lonestar
04-27-2008, 02:52 PM
if we wanted a returning wr, then i think jackson was the guy. if we wanted a pure wr then sweed was the choice. royal may be a decent wr in the college level but the steve smith type players are extremely rare!

we could have easily traded up into the 3rd for a solid dt, lb ect. many teams were willing to trade up or down this year.

the 4th round we go cb when we still havnt picked a solid rb, lb or dt???


so....yeah im pretty pissed this year. its not like we didnt have the extra picks to go get the guy we needed.

we could of had ALL the players in my mock. :tsk:

I stopped doing mocks because the moron in charge never gets it right..

I really thought this year mikey would go after players we needed to plug the obvious holes, I was really concerned when we got Robertson that he would consider this as THE FIX at DLINE.. I guess I was right again..

he really sees himself as the mastermind as someone that can work miracles with half assed player and turn them into HOFers.

Once again mikey has exceeded himself in DAFTING..

Lonestar
04-27-2008, 02:54 PM
I agree. I hope he's a diamond-in-the-rough, but Ahmad Galloway and Maurice Clarett weren't.

If Torain was the only reach in this draft, then no problem. But we've been reaching since Round Two.


mikey the GM has the longest arms in the NFL..




mastermind on the field,

micro mind in the DAFT room..

SmilinAssasSin27
04-27-2008, 03:01 PM
BTW, it's a little more than comical that anyone is criticizing a Denver Broncos Day 2 RB selection. They've never hit on RBs on Day 2. :laugh:

I have no issue w/ the player as far as talent goes. I'd never question Shanny in that regard. I just don't like the injury history.

BroncoJoe
04-27-2008, 03:05 PM
mikey the GM has the longest arms in the NFL..




mastermind on the field,

micro mind in the DAFT room..

Maybe you should call Bowlen?

Good grief. You can't even spell Draft, let alone select players for the Broncos...

nevcraw
04-27-2008, 03:27 PM
Just because Denver has a core competency in selecting RB's doesn't mean we should all blindly start oogling and awing over any player they select. I'd love for Torian to turn into a productive running back. That doesn't change my opinion of him as a 5th-round prospect.

no instead we expect you and others (LEX) to not like the pics b/c the players name wasn't listed on your mock draft. Or maybe you want to go blog about it..

r8rh8r
04-27-2008, 03:29 PM
no instead we expect you and others (LEX) to not like the pics b/c the players name wasn't listed on your mock draft. Or maybe you want to go blog about it..

Have you read my blog? I'm guessing you haven't because if you'd seen my draft grades thus far you'd realize you don't know what you're talking about.

I also didn't do a mock draft, ever.

BroncoJoe
04-27-2008, 03:29 PM
Blogs = internet garbage.

Lonestar
04-27-2008, 03:32 PM
Maybe you should call Bowlen?

Good grief. You can't even spell Draft, let alone select players for the Broncos...


neither can mikey


I call it DAFT for a reason look it up..

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/DAFT

r8rh8r
04-27-2008, 03:32 PM
Blogs = internet garbage.

Not any more than ESPN. Its all opinion. I like to share mine. You don't have to read because you're entitled to your opinion.

Krugan
04-27-2008, 03:34 PM
So whats the issue with Hart?

I would have guessed he would have been a better choice at some point than a oft injured slow bruiser?

Not trying to bring this pick down, but one has to believe this was a head scratcher at best.

r8rh8r
04-27-2008, 03:37 PM
So whats the issue with Hart?

I would have guessed he would have been a better choice at some point than a oft injured slow bruiser?

Not trying to bring this pick down, but one has to believe this was a head scratcher at best.

I think Torian was drafted to play a specific role. Hart doesn't fit that role. Hart does have better potential to be a 15-carry back though, and he's more versatile. Personally, I'd rather have him.

If Torian can come in and give us 5-7 Zack Crockett carries per game, I'll be happy. But outside of a goalline option and a special teams guy, my expectations are low.

Ziggy
04-27-2008, 03:40 PM
I have bashed Shanny as much as anyone on his draft record, but when it comes to late round RB picks, I'll defer to his opinion every time. Love it or hate it, he is the best at finding hidden gems at the RB positions in the later rounds. I'm backing him on this pick.

nevcraw
04-27-2008, 03:49 PM
Have you read my blog? I'm guessing you haven't because if you'd seen my draft grades thus far you'd realize you don't know what you're talking about.

I also didn't do a mock draft, ever.


Agreed. Terrible pick. There are at least 2 RB's I liked better than Torain here. He'll be listed at fullback by 2009 and really he's just a short-yardage option to try and overcome our horrible power success percentage and red zone efficiency.

who needs ur mock or your little blog. You put it here.. Miust be so hard to be a " pro scout" and find the time to blog too.

BroncoJoe
04-27-2008, 04:13 PM
Show me a paycheck from an NFL team, and I'll listen to you or read your blog...

r8rh8r
04-27-2008, 04:32 PM
who needs ur mock or your little blog. You put it here.. Miust be so hard to be a " pro scout" and find the time to blog too.

I never did a mock draft. I don't know what your talking about. If you think my writing sucks, don't read it. I could care less.

Scarface
04-27-2008, 05:12 PM
This site has a bunch of Torain runs.

http://video.aol.com/video-detail/ryan-torain-run/5432407

LRtagger
04-27-2008, 05:31 PM
BTW, it's a little more than comical that anyone is criticizing a Denver Broncos Day 2 RB selection. They've never hit on RBs on Day 2. :laugh:


Where are they all now?

If Mike is such a master at finding late round talented RB's, why did we spend so much money on bringing in Travis Henry (another RB that has not worked out).

I'd much rather have a long term solution then have to waste late round picks every year on stop gaps.

As much as TD did for this team, he sure did spoil us. Now we think every 6th round RB is going to the hall.

Scarface
04-27-2008, 05:36 PM
Where are they all now?

If Mike is such a master at finding late round talented RB's, why did we spend so much money on bringing in Travis Henry (another RB that has not worked out).

I'd much rather have a long term solution then have to waste late round picks every year on stop gaps.

As much as TD did for this team, he sure did spoil us. Now we think every 6th round RB is going to the hall.

I didn't say they're all 10 yr HOF type RBs. But c'mon he's taken so many backs late in the draft that have contributed: TD, MA, OG, Bell, Young, etc... I have to admit it's funny to watch people whine about this pick.

Nature Boy
04-27-2008, 05:39 PM
Really... Is this the great Zambini? Reveal yourself.

fcspikeit
04-27-2008, 05:39 PM
Except for Ryan Torain, Carlton Powell and Jack Williams I really like every guy we selected..

Not that I don't like these 3, it's just that I have never heard of either of them. I will just have to trust the coaches who had more access then me could see something in them. I really like every other player they scouted and took so I have to believe they see some of the same thing in these guys.

Our draft wasn't sexy guys, but come on. It wasn't that bad!

If we had to trade Hillis, Barrett and Larsen to have moved up for Smith or any of the other few mid grade guys, I for one will take the chance on Torain.

I really wanted Laws. Probably more then any player accept Nelson. We could have had him instead of Royal but the truth is, Royal has a better chance of helping us next year. He is a good player guys. I really don't see him busting.

The only way we get Stewart or Mendenhall is if we didn't take Clady. We really needed Clady. Look what we done for our O-line, it is getting bigger without losing the speed needed to run the zone blocking system. Great picks!

Nature Boy
04-27-2008, 05:43 PM
So whats the issue with Hart?



Mike Hart is always too small and too slow on every scouts radar. He's got intangibles that can't be measured. I think he'll make some team's roster and be a solid back up. Or there's always Canada.

TXBRONC
04-27-2008, 05:44 PM
we could of had tashard choice with the late 4th round pick. instead the cowboys take him a few spots later. why did the cowboys pick up another rb when they drafted felix jones in round 1 and already have barber? i'll tell you why....because choice has heart and is going to be a damn good football player in the nfl.

another missed oportunity by the broncos. :tsk:

i too am getting tired of second rate and lower tiered players. this diamond in the ruff stuff has got to end. the broncos seriously need to find a gm.....fast!


They took him because Barber is in the last year of his contract at least that's what they said on ESPN.

r8rh8r
04-27-2008, 05:48 PM
Except for Ryan Torain, Carlton Powell and Jack Williams I really like every guy we selected..

Not that I don't like these 3, it's just that I have never heard of either of them. I will just have to trust the coaches who had more access then me could see something in them. I really like every other player they scouted and took so I have to believe they see some of the same thing in these guys.

Our draft wasn't sexy guys, but come on. It wasn't that bad!

If we had to trade Hillis, Barrett and Larsen to have moved up for Smith or any of the other few mid grade guys, I for one will take the chance on Torain.

I really wanted Laws guys. Probably more then any player accept Nelson. We could have had him instead of Royal but the truth is, Royal has a better chance of helping us next year. He is a good player guys. I really don't see him busting.

The only way we get Stewart or Mendenhall is if we didn't take Clady. We really needed Clady. Look what we done for our O-line, it is getting bigger without losing the speed needed to run the zone blocking system. Great picks!

I agree with with you on Torian and Powell. I actually think Jack Williams was a fantastic pick. He's a prototype nickelback. He gives us great insurance in the event that Foxy leaves us next season. He's also a capable return man to push Royal in camp.

If I had my pick, I'd have tried to swap next year's first rounder for Mendenhall. They may have tried...

Nature Boy
04-27-2008, 05:52 PM
The only way we get Stewart or Mendenhall is if we didn't take Clady.

Apparently Mike Shanahan didn't think too highly of Mendenhall. Cause if he really wanted him, he could have made a move to get him. Mendenhall sat around til the 23rd pick behind Felix Jones.

Most everyone's 1 and 2 RBs were Mendenhall and Stewart but those 2 do not compare to last year's Adrian Peterson and Marshawn Lynch.

Funny thing, Marshawn Lynch's grandfather lives down the street to my buddy's house.

fcspikeit
04-27-2008, 06:05 PM
Apparently Mike Shanahan didn't think too highly of Mendenhall. Cause if he really wanted him, he could have made a move to get him. Mendenhall sat around til the 23rd pick behind Felix Jones.

Most everyone's 1 and 2 RBs were Mendenhall and Stewart but those 2 do not compare to last year's Adrian Peterson and Marshawn Lynch.

Funny thing, Marshawn Lynch's grandfather lives down the street to my buddy's house.

What would we have had to give up to move up and get him? Trade next years #1?

We needed almost everyone we got with our other picks, I am glad we didn't trade them all away to move up..

We also really need next years #1 to maybe get one of the 2 USC LB's coming out.. We are more then 1 player away.

LRtagger
04-27-2008, 06:09 PM
I didn't say they're all 10 yr HOF type RBs. But c'mon he's taken so many backs late in the draft that have contributed: TD, MA, OG, Bell, Young, etc... I have to admit it's funny to watch people whine about this pick.

I see. Those that disagree are whiners

Does that make those that agree homers?

Like I said..where are they all now? The last all-pro stud back we had on this roster was taken with the 51st overall pick

Bronco9798
04-27-2008, 06:11 PM
I see. Those that disagree are whiners

Does that make those that agree homers?

Like I said..where are they all now? The last all-pro stud back we had on this roster was taken with the 51st overall pick

Just people with a little patience to see how it all works out.

LRtagger
04-27-2008, 06:13 PM
I think I have been pretty patient over the last ten years. Maybe I am crazy for wanting a franchise face at the RB position.

Lonestar
04-27-2008, 06:15 PM
What would we have had to give up to move up and get him? Trade next years #1?

We needed almost everyone we got with our other picks, I am glad we didn't trade them all away to move up..

We also really need next years #1 to maybe get one of the 2 USC LB's coming out.. We are more then 1 player away.

Amen to that comment.. maybe to get back to 8-8.

But playoffs not a chance unless SAN has a bomb go off during a training session that takes out their entire starting lineup they are going to rule the roost again this year..

r8rh8r
04-27-2008, 06:16 PM
Just people with a little patience to see how it all works out.

Just because you have a negative opinion about a pick, doesn't mean you are impatient. People are just expressing their views. If we all have the same opinion, then there's no point in having a message board. If we all are supposed to wash all the judging thoughts out of our mind and wait until 2010 to see how it turns out, there's no point in having a message board.

Nature Boy
04-27-2008, 06:17 PM
What would we have had to give up to move up and get him? Trade next years #1?

We needed almost everyone we got with our other picks, I am glad we didn't trade them all away to move up..

We also really need next years #1 to maybe get one of the 2 USC LB's coming out.. We are more then 1 player away.

It'll definitely be a 1st and probably a 2nd from next yr's draft or next yr's 1st and a player, someone like Foxworth.

r8rh8r
04-27-2008, 06:19 PM
Amen to that comment.. maybe to get back to 8-8.

But playoffs not a chance unless SAN has a bomb go off during a training session that takes out their entire starting lineup they are going to rule the roost again this year..

I want to see Denver beat them down this year. If there's one thing we can all agree on here its that Philip Rivers is the most hated player in Denver. When our pass rush comes together this season he's gonna have a lot less to say to Jay.

Scarface
04-27-2008, 06:21 PM
File it away
Denver scored big with Arizona State running back Ryan Torain. This is a great fit.

The Broncos know what they are doing when it comes to running backs. They make it work with just about anybody. That was abundantly evident the past two years when Mike Bell and Selvin Young, both undrafted, stood out as rookies. Now, it's Torain's turn.

Unlike Bell and Young, who came into the league as average players who benefited by fitting Denver's scheme, Torain has a ton of natural ability. At 6-feet, 220 pounds, he is rugged and his running style fits Denver's vaunted zone-blocking scheme.

The Broncos drafted him in the fifth round because he was injured much of last season. But he is healthy now, so expect him to immediately get a chance to run the ball in Mike Shanahan's offense.

Young and veteran Travis Henry are also in the mix, but watch for Torain to emerge as a legitimate running back in this system soon.

Bill Williamson covers the NFL for ESPN.com.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/draft08/columns/story?columnist=williamson_bill&id=3370625

http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff302/ScarfaceBroncos2007/NFL%20Draft%2008/RB/RyanTorain.jpg

fcspikeit
04-27-2008, 06:24 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/draft08/columns/story?columnist=williamson_bill&id=3370625

http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff302/ScarfaceBroncos2007/NFL%20Draft%2008/RB/RyanTorain.jpg

If Torain pans out this was hands down a great draft!

claymore
04-27-2008, 06:25 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/draft08/columns/story?columnist=williamson_bill&id=3370625

http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff302/ScarfaceBroncos2007/NFL%20Draft%2008/RB/RyanTorain.jpg

I was excited till I saw Williamson wrote it! :laugh:

Lonestar
04-27-2008, 06:26 PM
I want to see Denver beat them down this year. If there's one thing we can all agree on here its that Philip Rivers is the most hated player in Denver. When our pass rush comes together this season he's gonna have a lot less to say to Jay.

lets hope so but they have a damned good team they have built over the past 4-5 years..

I fear more for OUR QB getting face planted, than us getting to rivers as we speak..

slim
04-27-2008, 06:27 PM
I was excited till I saw Williamson wrote it! :laugh:

Burger Bill is right. I don't understand all the negativity about this pick. I guess it's just because most people have never heard of him. Now, I am a little biased, but I think he will be a quality NFL back.

lex
04-27-2008, 06:37 PM
Burger Bill is right. I don't understand all the negativity about this pick. I guess it's just because most people have never heard of him. Now, I am a little biased, but I think he will be a quality NFL back.

No, being familiar with him doesnt make the pick more impressive. People proabably would like it more if they didnt know.

lex
04-27-2008, 06:42 PM
I have bashed Shanny as much as anyone on his draft record, but when it comes to late round RB picks, I'll defer to his opinion every time. Love it or hate it, he is the best at finding hidden gems at the RB positions in the later rounds. I'm backing him on this pick.

Theres a difference between it being the system/"anyone can do it" and picking talent late. If anyone can do it, it doesnt mean we are picking good talent late,...it just means we are getting by on marginal talent because of the system. And along those lines, if any joe schmoe can excel in this system, imagine what an eliter runner can do.

tubby
04-27-2008, 07:20 PM
Slim, I blame all the negativity toward Ryan Torian on you. You should have done a better job of promoting this guy.

claymore
04-27-2008, 07:21 PM
Slim sucks at recruiting IMO. :coffee:

BroncoAV06
04-27-2008, 07:38 PM
Just because you have a negative opinion about a pick, doesn't mean you are impatient. People are just expressing their views. If we all have the same opinion, then there's no point in having a message board. If we all are supposed to wash all the judging thoughts out of our mind and wait until 2010 to see how it turns out, there's no point in having a message board.

I think what bothers people the most is that because it is not a guy that they know are wanted they automatically write Ryan off as a bad pick. I can understand not liking the pick but people say horrible pick, season is over. Write off the player before he even does anything. Seems to me that Ryan could be a 3rd down back, get a TD or two, hey we could of had another player but we have to see what happens with Ryan a player who has a chance to help the team all be it little if he gets some carries. What if we would have selected Goff or said DT, would he of started ahead of the 2 LB's we signed to start and Williams or sit on the bench? Who knows.

slim
04-27-2008, 07:43 PM
Slim sucks at recruiting IMO. :coffee:

That's not the only thing I suck at.

tubby
04-27-2008, 07:44 PM
Slim, what can you tell me about Ryan Torian's corn-rows? Did he cut them off after the Lisfranc injury?

slim
04-27-2008, 07:47 PM
Slim, what can you tell me about Ryan's corn-rows? Did he cut them off after the Lisfranc injury?

I think he ditched the corn-rows awhile back. I think that's why he ran such a slow 40 time...

tubby
04-27-2008, 08:25 PM
I think he ditched the corn-rows awhile back. I think that's why he ran such a slow 40 time...

Good call on his part. I hope Clady does the same or I may have flashbacks of Foster.

Shanahan said Torain has first round ability. :cool:

shank
04-27-2008, 08:28 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfU-U3VmTX4

private workout video. not very telling one way or the other, but a good time waster.

slim
04-27-2008, 08:30 PM
Good call on his part. I hope Clady does the same or I may have flashbacks of Foster.

Shanahan said Torain has first round ability. :cool:

Well, I don't know about that. I would say more like third round.

Tned
04-27-2008, 08:40 PM
ARIZONA STATE RB RYAN TORAIN CONFERENCE CALL (Rd. 5 - 139th overall)

On how it feels to be a Bronco
"I am so excited. They are a great running team, a great place to play, a great coach, great players and a great team. I can't wait. I am excited to be there."

On his health
"I feel great. I am back to 100 percent, and I have been working out every day. When I got hurt it was a bad situation, and I couldn't finish my season. I just stayed on the grind, got back to 100 percent and tried to showcase my talent."

On the exact injury
"I tore a ligament in my foot, they call it Lisfranc. Rehab went amazing. I had a new surgery where they put buttons in my foot to tie it together. In the past, they used to use screws and you would have to have two surgeries. I had that new surgery and it healed up faster."

On when he expected to be drafted
"They said right in between mid third and early fifth [round]. I stayed cool and stayed patient. I watched a lot of my friends go and a lot of guys I have met throughout this whole process. It has been a real good day."

On what he brings to the Denver running game
"I am very versatile. I can catch out of the backfield, I can line up as a receiver and I run down hill. I can make guys miss, and I feel like I can do great things for this team."

On recovering from such a serious injury
"I had a great foot specialist, so I was not skeptical at all. I was just ready to get back on the field. I am working out on agility and quick twitch. I am just trying to stay in shape."

On his draft status had he not of been hurt
"I really can't call it. The draft is the draft. I was ranked at the top at the beginning of the year. I was at the top of the list, but once I got hurt and was done for the season it all fell apart. I just had to pick all the pieces up and rebuild."

On the Broncos' success at the running back position
"Watching the running backs throughout the year, they are a great team with a great

http://den.scout.com/2/750549.html?refid=400&CMP=OTC-K9B140813162&ATT=5

lex
04-27-2008, 09:43 PM
Good call on his part. I hope Clady does the same or I may have flashbacks of Foster.

Shanahan said Torain has first round ability. :cool:


Shanahan says a lot of things...and rarely is he wrong on personnel.

Lonestar
04-27-2008, 09:57 PM
Good call on his part. I hope Clady does the same or I may have flashbacks of Foster.

Shanahan said Torain has first round ability. :cool:


what do you expect him to say?

Lonestar
04-27-2008, 09:59 PM
Shanahan says a lot of things...and rarely is he wrong on personnel..


ahahahahahahaha :laugh:

LRtagger
04-28-2008, 08:26 AM
I still dont like the pick...but I'm not going to sit here and hope he sucks just so I can say I told you so.

I hope I am eating crow in 2-3 years and he ends up the next TD...but IMO chances of that are pretty slim.

I think no matter what moves we make in the offseason, this team always has a chance to win the west and/or make the playoffs...I dont think this draft made the team worse. I still think we will be better next year...I just see some missed opportunities. In 3-4 years we may be saying this was one of the best RB draft classes ever and we didnt take advantage of it.

lex
04-28-2008, 09:20 AM
I still dont like the pick...but I'm not going to sit here and hope he sucks just so I can say I told you so.

I hope I am eating crow in 2-3 years and he ends up the next TD...but IMO chances of that are pretty slim.

I think no matter what moves we make in the offseason, this team always has a chance to win the west and/or make the playoffs...I dont think this draft made the team worse. I still think we will be better next year...I just see some missed opportunities. In 3-4 years we may be saying this was one of the best RB draft classes ever and we didnt take advantage of it.

Even if he does well, it doesnt mean it was a good pick. 1) it just goes to show that anyone can do well in Denver. It doesnt mean he's good.; 2) it doesnt mean we needed to draft him there.

When people like Burger Bill say, "well suited for Denvers system" its code word for "slow guy, who would suck anywhere else."

WARHORSE
04-28-2008, 09:47 AM
If hes productive, hes a winner.

Lets wait to see what he brings to the table.

Tned
04-28-2008, 02:40 PM
Coming into 2007, he ranked second in the Pac-10 Conference among returning backs in total rushing yards. He started six games this season collecting 553 net rushing yards and five touchdowns. He also tallied two receiving touchdowns.

Possessing the perfect combination of brawn and speed, Torain has been listed by ESPN's Mel Kiper as the No. 2 senior running back in the nation for 2007. He was sure first day pick in the upcoming 2008 NFL draft, and some believed that he could possibly be taken in the first round. With his injury, his participation in the February’s

http://arizonastate.scout.com/2/691945.html

Tned
04-28-2008, 02:42 PM
Preseason Top 20 College Running Backs
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Steuber
ScoutNFLExperts.com Aug 22, 2007

Scout.com NFL Analyst Chris Steuber shares his list of the nation's Top 20 college running backs as they gear up for the 2007 season. Find out who he thinks will draw the attention of NFL Scouts this year.

1. Darren McFadden (6-foot-2, 205-pounds), Arkansas (Jr.)

McFadden provides instant excitement when he's on the field whether he's in the backfield, split out wide, or utilized in Arkansas' "Wildcat" formation where he lines up at quarterback. The versatile McFadden provides the Razorback offense with a playmaker who can take it to the house whenever he touches the ball. In 2006, McFadden rushed for 1,647 yards on 284 carries with 14 touchdowns. It's been reported that his mother already said her son will make the jump to the NFL following the 2007 college football season. If he stays healthy and continues his spectacular play, McFadden will become the first pick in the 2008 NFL Draft.

2. Steve Slaton (5-foot-10, 195-pounds), West Virginia (Jr.)

A shifty, elusive runner, Slaton provides an offense with an explosive playmaker out of the backfield. He's not the biggest back in the nation, but he's the most productive. Slaton's totals over the last two seasons are as impressive as any player in the country. He's carried the ball 453 times for 2,872 rushing yards and 33 touchdowns. Those numbers alone are first-round worthy.

3. Jonathan Stewart (5-foot-11, 230-pounds), Oregon (Jr.)

A strong, physical, speedy back, Stewart is a powerful runner who possesses quick feet and agility that allow him to make the opposition miss. He shows signs of greatness, rushing for over 140-yards in a single game four times in 2006, but he has to become more consistent as a runner. If you look at Stewart's rushing totals (981 yards on 183 attempts with 10 touchdowns) from 2006, you'd ask yourself, "How is he a top-rated running back?" The intangibles he brings to the field are what make him special -- his explosive running skills and his versatility as a return-man on special teams. Expect his production and workload to increase in 2007.

4. Ray Rice (5-foot-9, 200-pounds), Rutgers (Jr.)

A workhorse runner who is efficient and consistent, Rice leaves it all on the field. He displays excellent strength and balance and is able to obtain the tough yards. Since his arrival at Rutgers, Rice was an instrumental part of the program's resurgence. He started as a true freshman and achieved instant success, recording 1,120 rushing yards on 195 carries. Rice had a breakout season in 2006, totaling 1,794 rushing yards on a workman-like 335 carries and 20 touchdowns. If he is able to duplicate his statistics from 2006 this season, Rice is surely a first-round selection.

5. Felix Jones (6-foot-0, 200-pounds), Arkansas (Jr.)

Arkansas has the best running game in the country, featuring Darren McFadden and Felix Jones. Not since Auburn's tandem of Ronnie Brown and Cadillac Williams has a team possessed a dynamic duo like this. Everyone knows who McFadden is, but the consensus has never heard of Jones. Splitting time with an all-world runner like McFadden can be tough, but Jones shows a unique blend of size, speed and elusiveness. In 2006, he amassed 1,168 rushing yards on just 154 carries. Arkansas will feature McFadden all season long, but if given an opportunity, Jones will prove he's an elite runner.

6. Mike Hart (5-foot-9, 196-pounds), Michigan (Sr.)

A hardworking, productive runner with excellent vision and skills, Hart has been through a lot at Michigan. He's had some great seasons and battled through injuries during his three-years as a Wolverine. His freshman and junior seasons at Michigan were outstanding, but he suffered a sophomore jinx in 2005 when he suffered a hamstring injury. Hart totaled 3,679 rushing yards on 750 carries and 27 touchdowns during his career in Ann Arbor. Entering his senior season, he looks to have an injury-free, productive season that positions him high on draft boards.

7. Ryan Torain (6-foot-1, 213-pounds), Arizona State (Sr.)

Nicknamed "Train", Torain is the most underrated running back in the country. A former JUCO transfer, his first season with the Sun Devils was a memorable one as he rushed for 1,229 yards and seven touchdowns. Torain combines size, speed, strength, and vision to his impressive game and showed flashes of greatness against California last season. He rushed for 191 yards on 24 carries and a touchdown in a 49-21 loss to the Golden Bears. Despite the loss, Torain showed his promise… Choo Choo.

8. James Davis (5-foot-11, 205-pounds), Clemson (Jr.)

A tremendous runner with excellent strength and speed, Davis has shown the ability to be a playmaker. Davis shares the backfield with sophomore sensation C.J. Spiller, but it's Davis who makes the offensive engine of Clemson run. He rushed for 1,187 yards on 203 carries and 17 touchdowns. He's a scoring machine who will sacrifice his playing time for the team's success.

9. Jamaal Charles (6-foot-1, 200-pounds), Texas (Jr.)

Charles combines speed and elusiveness, making him a dangerous weapon on the football field. He has yet to eclipse the 1,000-yard rushing mark during his first two years with the Longhorns, and with that said, he's decided not to participate in track -- as he's done over the past two years -- and to concentrate solely on football. With Charles' new dedication to football, his production may sky rocket.

10. Ian Johnson (5-foot-11, 194-pounds), Boise State (Jr.)

Known for his game-winning two-point conversion in the Fiesta Bowl against Oklahoma, Johnson stormed onto the scene last year, rushing for 1,714 yards and 25 touchdowns while helping Boise State to a 12-0 record. Johnson has excellent skills and a great awareness for the end zone. He's a player to keep an eye on in 2007 as it appears he's on the verge of great accomplishments.

The rest of the list:

11. Tashard Choice (6-foot-1, 205-pounds), Georgia Tech (Sr.)

12. Branden Ore (5-foot-11, 202-pounds), Virginia Tech (Jr.)

13. Albert Young (5-foot-10, 209-pounds), Iowa (Sr.)

14. Tyrell Sutton (5-foot-9, 190-pounds), Northwestern (Jr.)

15. Yvenson Bernard (5-foot-9, 202-pounds), Oregon State (Sr.)

16. Allen Patrick (6-foot, 191-pounds), Oklahoma (Sr.)

17. BenJarvis Green-Ellis (5-foot-11, 225-pounds), Mississippi (Sr.)

18. Jorvorskie Lane (6-foot, 274-pounds), Texas A&M (Jr.)

19. Marlon Lucky (6-foot, 210-pounds), Nebraska (Jr.)

20. Andre Brown (6-foot, 232-pounds), N.C. State (Jr.)



http://profootballexperts.scout.com/2/671086.html

Tned
04-28-2008, 04:48 PM
Workout video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfU-U3VmTX4

Tned
04-28-2008, 04:51 PM
Pete Prisco Draft Grades


Denver Broncos

Best pick: Running back Ryan Torain, taken in the fifth round, has second-round ability but a foot injury dropped his stock. The Broncos will love this kid.

Questionable move: Second-round pick Eddie Royal will give the passing game a speedy receiver who can help Jay Cutler, but did he go too high at No. 42 overall?

Second-day gem: Sixth-round pick Spencer Larsen was a tackling machine at Arizona.

Overall grade: B. They needed a left tackle and got one in the first round in Ryan Clady. The rest of the draft included some nice choices.

http://www.sportsline.com/nfl/story/10802077

Rex
04-28-2008, 04:53 PM
Well, I don't know about that. I would say more like third round.

You really are not qualified to make a comment. Please go add up some numbers.:rolleyes:

Retired_Member_001
04-28-2008, 04:55 PM
I'm not too sure about this pick. Shanahan DOES have the ability to find good backs out of no where so I'll put my trust in him.

By the way, thanks for the links Tned.

Tned
04-28-2008, 05:04 PM
I'm not too sure about this pick. Shanahan DOES have the ability to find good backs out of no where so I'll put my trust in him.

By the way, thanks for the links Tned.

The more I read about this kid, the more I think he could be a big surprise for all of us (myself included) initial doubters.

It appears that he had a pretty serious ankle injury that required some new-fangled surgery. "If" that ankle is back to full strength and with some of the promise he apparently showed, he could turn out to be a heck of a pick.

Only time will tell and I am not about to crown him the next 2,000 yard rusher in Denver. At this point I am just intrigued and not feeling quite as bad about the pick as I did when it was first made.

Retired_Member_001
04-28-2008, 05:08 PM
The more I read about this kid, the more I think he could be a big surprise for all of us (myself included) initial doubters.

It appears that he had a pretty serious ankle injury that required some new-fangled surgery. "If" that ankle is back to full strength and with some of the promise he apparently showed, he could turn out to be a heck of a pick.

Only time will tell and I am not about to crown him the next 2,000 yard rusher in Denver. At this point I am just intrigued and not feeling quite as bad about the pick as I did when it was first made.

Yep, I agree.

Another added thing is that he can catch. We fell in love with screens last season and passes to the running back, so he will definitely be seeing some of the ball if he can make the team. Hopefull it all works out for him and he can be a good running back for this team.

Rex
04-28-2008, 05:09 PM
The more I read about this kid, the more I think he could be a big surprise for all of us (myself included) initial doubters.

It appears that he had a pretty serious ankle injury that required some new-fangled surgery. "If" that ankle is back to full strength and with some of the promise he apparently showed, he could turn out to be a heck of a pick.

Only time will tell and I am not about to crown him the next 2,000 yard rusher in Denver. At this point I am just intrigued and not feeling quite as bad about the pick as I did when it was first made.

Same injury as Ty Law, Dwight Freeney, and most likely Larry Johnson had. Lisfranc fracture (dislocation) of foot.

Tned
04-28-2008, 05:11 PM
Same injury as Ty Law, Dwight Freeney, and most likely Larry Johnson had. Lisfranc fracture (dislocation) of foot.

And apparently rather than the traditional surgery where they put in screws and then go back in x months later and remove them, he had some new surgery where they attach the ligaments with 'buttons' that don't have to be removed. Hopefully, that means the healing time is shorter, although I imagine the overall result of the surgery would be the same.

Retired_Member_001
04-28-2008, 05:15 PM
And apparently rather than the traditional surgery where they put in screws and then go back in x months later and remove them, he had some new surgery where they attach the ligaments with 'buttons' that don't have to be removed. Hopefully, that means the healing time is shorter, although I imagine the overall result of the surgery would be the same.

Do you know if it was a dislocated ankle or a dislocated foot?

A Dislocated ankle usually messes with all the tendons and the little bones that connect your leg to your foot.

Rex
04-28-2008, 05:16 PM
And apparently rather than the traditional surgery where they put in screws and then go back in x months later and remove them, he had some new surgery where they attach the ligaments with 'buttons' that don't have to be removed. Hopefully, that means the healing time is shorter, although I imagine the overall result of the surgery would be the same.

I dont know the specific procedure. It is basically a dislocation at the midfoot and sometimes if it is not big, they dont even do surgery, they just immobilize it. Whatever they did, I am sure he will be fine.

Retired_Member_001
04-28-2008, 05:20 PM
I dont know the specific procedure. It is basically a dislocation at the midfoot and sometimes if it is not big, they dont even do surgery, they just immobilize it. Whatever they did, I am sure he will be fine.

Midfoot, good. That's not as bad as the ankle.

Tned
04-28-2008, 05:23 PM
Do you know if it was a dislocated ankle or a dislocated foot?

A Dislocated ankle usually messes with all the tendons and the little bones that connect your leg to your foot.

It's the lisfrank/midfoot injury that Cswil is talking about.


Hard work, perseverance and skill allowed Ryan Torain to become a fifth-round pick.

But give an assist to modern medicine.

Torain, an Arizona State running back, suffered a Lisfranc sprain in his left foot that ended his senior season after six games.

Yet a new surgical procedure sped his recovery and allowed him to participate in February's scouting combine.

"They put buttons in my foot, where they kind of tied it together," Torain said, adding the procedure was done by an orthopedist affiliated with the NBA's Phoenix Suns. "In the past, they used to have screws and it required two surgeries and an extra four months. But because I had the new surgery, it healed up way faster."

Torain was off to another fast start when he was hurt, with three 100-yard games on the heels of a 1,229-yard junior season that had him near the top of prospect lists at his position.

After the injury, he spent two months in a wheelchairlike device that propped up his left leg and spent another month on a single crutch before he could resume workouts.

He's now exercising daily.

"I'm working out on agility and quick twitch," he said.

Denver has had only mixed results at running back in the draft in recent seasons but has struck gold with second-day picks such as Terrell Davis and Mike Anderson.

"I feel like I can do great things for this team," Torain said.

Broncos coach Mike Shanahan said he felt very confident Torain would be ready to go in the short term and praised Torain's running instincts.

"I think he's got first-round ability, so I really just put the whammy on him," Shanahan added.

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/apr/28/surgery-puts-broncos-pick-torain-back-in-running/

Retired_Member_001
04-28-2008, 05:25 PM
It's the lisfrank/midfoot injury that Cswil is talking about.



http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/apr/28/surgery-puts-broncos-pick-torain-back-in-running/

Yeah it's just I thought you originally said an ankle injury and they are usually more complicated.

Surgery done by a Phoenix Suns guy? Torain is doomed :laugh:.

slim
04-29-2008, 09:43 PM
You really are not qualified to make a comment. Please go add up some numbers.:rolleyes:

Well, I did see every game he played at ASU. I doubt anyone else here can say that. He is a good RB, there is NO question about his physical ability. The only question is health...can he stay healthy.

TXBRONC
04-29-2008, 10:49 PM
Well, I did see every game he played at ASU. I doubt anyone else here can say that. He is a good RB, there is NO question about his physical ability. The only question is health...can he stay healthy.

He looks like he could be a very good power back.

slim
04-29-2008, 10:52 PM
He looks like he could be a very good power back.

He is a very good power back and he plays much faster than his 40 time. I don't ever remember thinking "man, this guy is slow". He is plenty fast enough when he puts the pads on.

TXBRONC
04-29-2008, 10:58 PM
He is a very good power back and he plays much faster than his 40 time. I don't ever remember thinking "man, this guy is slow". He is plenty fast enough when he puts the pads on.

The most important speed a football player can have is football speed.

Tned
04-30-2008, 07:07 AM
He is a very good power back and he plays much faster than his 40 time. I don't ever remember thinking "man, this guy is slow". He is plenty fast enough when he puts the pads on.

I was wondering about this, since his 40 time isn't great. In pads, would you still say that he has the speed to take it to the house, if he gets past the LB's, or is he the type that will get run down after 40 by the DBs?

Don't get me wrong, someone who consistantly gets us first downs and then pops a 20-40 yard run would be great, but if he can also go 60-80 for a long score (like TD, Portis, etc.) that would be a bonus.

gobroncsnv
04-30-2008, 07:10 AM
I see. Those that disagree are whiners

Does that make those that agree homers?

Like I said..where are they all now? The last all-pro stud back we had on this roster was taken with the 51st overall pick

And he turned out to be such a money-grubbing whiner who was so full of ...... himself, we traded him away to get Champ. You weren't impressed when Anderson got 1500 yards? How about Gary getting 1200 some when he wasn't even the starter that year?

Would much rather have a line that can keep Cutler from having a ruptured spleen. You're right, it WOULD be great to get a back that stuck around for a few years, but we have a really solid rushing attack year in, year out. All without really having fabulous talent for the line, same for the back. Now that we are going after bigger (and faster) linemen, once we do get the back you're looking for, it will be lights out...

TXBRONC
04-30-2008, 07:13 AM
I was wondering about this, since his 40 time isn't great. In pads, would you still say that he has the speed to take it to the house, if he gets past the LB's, or is he the type that will get run down after 40 by the DBs?

Don't get me wrong, someone who consistantly gets us first downs and then pops a 20-40 yard run would be great, but if he can also go 60-80 for a long score (like TD, Portis, etc.) that would be a bonus.

I'm not sure what Mike Anderson's timed speed was but he did pop a few big runs while he was in Denver. Maybe on those occassions he stayed in Holiday Inn the night before. :confused: :D

Tned
04-30-2008, 07:35 AM
I'm not sure what Mike Anderson's timed speed was but he did pop a few big runs while he was in Denver. Maybe on those he occassion he stayed in Holiday Inn the night before. :confused: :D

He definately did. The only one that comes to mind (and I know there were more) was him high stepping through a leg tackle (probably a safety, but could have been an LB) around 15-20 past the LOS.

In 'rough' categories, I tend to place backs in three groups:

Bigger and/or slower backs (Ron Dayne) that can often get to the second level, but rarely get past the LBs without breaking a tackle. If they do get past, they are often run down from behind.

Mid sized and or quicker backs (Mike Bell) that given a crease has enough burst to get to the second level and past the LBs, but is often caught from behind or more often a safety/corner will force him out of bounds taking an angle route.

Fast (Portis/Bell) that if they get daylight in front of them, they are gone. Rarely do they get caught/stoppped once they have daylight in front of them.

I am guessing that Torain is in that middle group, which can still be VERY productive, but isn't as exciting as the guy that can score any time he touches the ball.

I hate to say it, but it has been so long since I watched TD play, that my memory is fuzzy. I think he fell somewhere between my middle and fast group. He didn't have blazing speed (40 time), but did have good football speed and often took it to the house if he made it clear of the LBs.

Ziggy
04-30-2008, 08:35 AM
He definately did. The only one that comes to mind (and I know there were more) was him high stepping through a leg tackle (probably a safety, but could have been an LB) around 15-20 past the LOS.

In 'rough' categories, I tend to place backs in three groups:

Bigger and/or slower backs (Ron Dayne) that can often get to the second level, but rarely get past the LBs without breaking a tackle. If they do get past, they are often run down from behind.

Mid sized and or quicker backs (Mike Bell) that given a crease has enough burst to get to the second level and past the LBs, but is often caught from behind or more often a safety/corner will force him out of bounds taking an angle route.

Fast (Portis/Bell) that if they get daylight in front of them, they are gone. Rarely do they get caught/stoppped once they have daylight in front of them.

I am guessing that Torain is in that middle group, which can still be VERY productive, but isn't as exciting as the guy that can score any time he touches the ball.

I hate to say it, but it has been so long since I watched TD play, that my memory is fuzzy. I think he fell somewhere between my middle and fast group. He didn't have blazing speed (40 time), but did have good football speed and often took it to the house if he made it clear of the LBs.

He actually had 4.7 speed, which is one of the reasons he lasted so long in the draft. That, and an injury history. He was just one of those players that played a lot faster in pads than his 40 times suggest. He wasn't a burner like Portis or Tater, but he hit the hole so fast that often times he was into the second level before defenders had a chance to adjust thier angles and chase.

LRtagger
04-30-2008, 09:06 AM
And he turned out to be such a money-grubbing whiner who was so full of ...... himself, we traded him away to get Champ. You weren't impressed when Anderson got 1500 yards? How about Gary getting 1200 some when he wasn't even the starter that year?



No, Olandis Gary and Mike Anderson are not impressive backs to me. Sure Anderson ran for 1500 yards in his rookie year...what did he do after that? Over the next three seasons he barely had 1000 yards COMBINED. That is not a franchise back. Gary is probably the farthest thing from a franchise back and we wasted a 4th round pick on him.

My point is the last time we had a back that was capable of rushing for 1500 yards year in and year out for an extended ammount of years was when we drafted RB on day one. And even when we had to trade him, we replaced him with another franchise face. What did we get for Gary and Anderson?? Nothing and...oh yea nothing.

I get tired of having to draft a new face year after year and hoping that it works out. Why not use a high pick on a runner and then not have to worry about it for another 7-8 years? The teams in the AFC that have been winning consistantly over the last couple of years all have high pick RBs.

Laurence Maroney - Round 1
Joseph Addai - Round 1
LT - Round 1
Willie Parker is an exception, but the Steelers just drafted Mendenhall to replace him - Round 1

Top four AFC teams all have used high picks on RB. The last time Denver's leading rusher was the same guy in back to back years was 2002-2003 when Portis eclipsed 1500 yards in both seasons. Since then we havent had a single back run for over 1250 yards in a season and every year our leading rusher was a different face.

Like I said, I hope Torain provides for us...but I would feel much more comfortable with a day one back carrying the load over the next several years...especially from this years draft class. I'm not going to count on Torain to be that guy. I'm willing to bet Mike uses yet another draft pick on a RB in 2009.

mclark
04-30-2008, 09:31 AM
So whats the issue with Hart?

I would have guessed he would have been a better choice at some point than a oft injured slow bruiser?

Not trying to bring this pick down, but one has to believe this was a head scratcher at best.

I think the biggest issue with Hart is he 'doesn't time well'. Would I rather have Hart or Torrain? I think we could have drafted Hart and signed Torrain as a free agent -- we could have got both of them. I think Hart will be the better pro. We'll see.

turftoad
04-30-2008, 09:46 AM
I think the biggest issue with Hart is he 'doesn't time well'. Would I rather have Hart or Torrain? I think we could have drafted Hart and signed Torrain as a free agent -- we could have got both of them. I think Hart will be the better pro. We'll see.

Hart doesn't time well and he doesn't have the size to be a feature back.
I'm not high on Hart. I think he's a roll player and will never be aq feature back.
That said, I think thats why Shanahan drafted Torain, he thinks he can eventually be a feature back with his size and skill set.

Ziggy
04-30-2008, 10:07 AM
Don't know if anyone has mentioned it, but Torain doesn't put the ball on the ground either. He had no fumbles in 300+ carries at ASU.

Drill-N-Fill
04-30-2008, 10:09 AM
There is going to be a lot crow to eaten come week 7.

dogfish
04-30-2008, 10:52 AM
If Torian can come in and give us 5-7 Zack Crockett carries per game, I'll be happy. But outside of a goalline option and a special teams guy, my expectations are low.

i think crockett is an apt comparison for the role he's likely to play for us. . . i'm sure shanahan is still looking for that big back who can handle a heavy load and dish out punishment in the 4th quarter, but big guys who are quick enough to be every down backs aren't so easy to find. . . shanahan seems to fall in love with these guys' size, only to remember after a year of watching them that he doesn't really want to give many carries to a RB that doesn't have the speed to rip off big runs-- then the bigger, slower back inevitably gets moved to fullback. . .

i don't mind fishing for greatness in the later rounds, but i do think we could have waited if torain was the target. . . sites like draftcountdown and draftscout.com (a well-respected draft resource) had him ranked as a UDFA-- i know, i know, that doesn't guarantee anything. . . maybe torain can grow into a fulltime starter, but IMO the odds aren't great. . . he certainly has some potential, but i think it's more likely that he's just going to give us some size in a rotational role-- and there's nothing wrong with that, but we could have gotten goal line terror jehuu caulcrick as a UDFA to fill the same role. . . IF shanahan is actually looking for a potential starter, he passed on the chance to take workhorses matt forte and kevin smith to draft a return specialist/slot receiver-- and passed on tashard choice in the 4th as well. . . hopefully torain is healthy enough to contribute. . .

turftoad
04-30-2008, 10:56 AM
i think crockett is an apt comparison for the role he's likely to play for us. . . i'm sure shanahan is still looking for that big back who can handle a heavy load and dish out punishment in the 4th quarter, but big guys who are quick enough to be every down backs aren't so easy to find. . . shanahan seems to fall in love with these guys' size, only to remember after a year of watching them that he doesn't really want to give many carries to a RB that doesn't have the speed to rip off big runs-- then the bigger, slower back inevitably gets moved to fullback. . .

i don't mind fishing for greatness in the later rounds, but i do think we could have waited if torain was the target. . . sites like draftcountdown and draftscout.com (a well-respected draft resource) had him ranked as a UDFA-- i know, i know, that doesn't guarantee anything. . . maybe torain can grow into a fulltime starter, but IMO the odds aren't great. . . he certainly has some potential, but i think it's more likely that he's just going to give us some size in a rotational role-- and there's nothing wrong with that, but we could have gotten goal line terror jehuu caulcrick as a UDFA to fill the same role. . . IF shanahan is actually looking for a potential starter, he passed on the chance to take workhorses matt forte and kevin smith to draft a return specialist/slot receiver-- and passed on tashard choice in the 4th as well. . . hopefully torain is healthy enough to contribute. . .

Bottom line is, if you want a guy bad enough, you gotta take him before you think someone else will.

I think he's worth a shot as a late rounder. Shanny wanted him and he didn't care who was still on the board.

Tned
04-30-2008, 11:12 AM
Bottom line is, if you want a guy bad enough, you gotta take him before you think someone else will.

I think he's worth a shot as a late rounder. Shanny wanted him and he didn't care who was still on the board.

I think the same can be said for Royal, and some of the DE/DT choices last year.

Good or bad, Shanahan often has a draft board that doesn't mirror what Kiper and the experts have. There are players he wants and if they are available where he hoped to get them, he takes them, even if they were 'projected' to go a round or two later.

Obviously, Shanny has had a mixed drafting record, so it is hard to say whether or not his approach is a good one.

Lonestar
04-30-2008, 11:53 AM
No, Olandis Gary and Mike Anderson are not impressive backs to me. Sure Anderson ran for 1500 yards in his rookie year...what did he do after that? Over the next three seasons he barely had 1000 yards COMBINED. That is not a franchise back. Gary is probably the farthest thing from a franchise back and we wasted a 4th round pick on him.

My point is the last time we had a back that was capable of rushing for 1500 yards year in and year out for an extended ammount of years was when we drafted RB on day one. And even when we had to trade him, we replaced him with another franchise face. What did we get for Gary and Anderson?? Nothing and...oh yea nothing.

I get tired of having to draft a new face year after year and hoping that it works out. Why not use a high pick on a runner and then not have to worry about it for another 7-8 years? The teams in the AFC that have been winning consistantly over the last couple of years all have high pick RBs.

Laurence Maroney - Round 1
Joseph Addai - Round 1
LT - Round 1
Willie Parker is an exception, but the Steelers just drafted Mendenhall to replace him - Round 1

Top four AFC teams all have used high picks on RB. The last time Denver's leading rusher was the same guy in back to back years was 2002-2003 when Portis eclipsed 1500 yards in both seasons. Since then we havent had a single back run for over 1250 yards in a season and every year our leading rusher was a different face.

Like I said, I hope Torain provides for us...but I would feel much more comfortable with a day one back carrying the load over the next several years...especially from this years draft class. I'm not going to count on Torain to be that guy. I'm willing to bet Mike uses yet another draft pick on a RB in 2009.



A good post but I have to add most of those teams drafting RB day in the first round have most of the other pieces all ready in place..

They have a winning record already because they have drafted well in years past and are not necessarily rebuilding their team from the ground up..

IF one of these RB's do not pan out this year look for mikey (PAT) to rethink our priorities in 2009 draft.

Tned
04-30-2008, 12:04 PM
A good post but I have to add most of those teams drafting RB day in the first round have most of the other pieces all ready in place..

They have a winning record already because they have drafted well in years past and are not necessarily rebuilding their team from the ground up..

IF one of these RB's do not pan out this year look for mikey (PAT) to rethink our priorities in 2009 draft.

Plus, those teams didn't have a running back, that while injury prone, lead the league in rushing for the early part of last year.

Henry may or may not remain healthy (or suspension free), but when he gets on the field, he does produce.

Requiem / The Dagda
04-30-2008, 12:07 PM
Barrett could have been their best player on the board, so guessing where he was actually ranked and what experts thought are really moot points.

Lonestar
04-30-2008, 12:31 PM
Plus, those teams didn't have a running back, that while injury prone, lead the league in rushing for the early part of last year.

Henry may or may not remain healthy (or suspension free), but when he gets on the field, he does produce.



I'm not all that sure he produced anything more than most of our backs might have done against those weak sister defense he played against the first four games.. If memory serves correctly they were all in the bottom ten at the time when I (about game 6 or so) looked at their numbers against the rush..
I had been impressed the the argument "lead the league in rushing before he was injured" comment many make.. SO I looked up the numbers at the time.
Most were in the bottom five..

The EOY ranking were..
OAK 31 146 per game thenry got 128 -18 yards under average they gave up
BUF 25 124 per game thenry got 139 +15 yards under average they gave up
CAR 18 110 per game thenry got 35 -75 yards under average they gave up
Colt 15 106 per game thenry got 131 +25 yards under average they gave up


Minus 53 yards against the average rushing yards given up..

Sorry but he was a leader against poor teams.. Nothing IMO to write home about..

topscribe
04-30-2008, 01:19 PM
I'm not all that sure he produced anything more than most of our backs might have done against those weak sister defense he played against the first four games.. If memory serves correctly they were all in the bottom ten at the time when I (about game 6 or so) looked at their numbers against the rush..
I had been impressed the the argument "lead the league in rushing before he was injured" comment many make.. SO I looked up the numbers at the time.
Most were in the bottom five..

The EOY ranking were..
OAK 31 146 per game thenry got 128 -18 yards under average they gave up
BUF 25 124 per game thenry got 139 +15 yards under average they gave up
CAR 18 110 per game thenry got 35 -75 yards under average they gave up
Colt 15 106 per game thenry got 131 +25 yards under average they gave up


Minus 53 yards against the average rushing yards given up..

Sorry but he was a leader against poor teams.. Nothing IMO to write home about..

I don't think the problem was Henry, JR, or anywhere with the RBs. It is
with the O-line (and I think I'm preaching to the choir in you). If Denver's
running scheme is working, my wife could get yardage. The Broncos have a
stable of good . . . not great, but good . . . running backs, and that is all
they need.

They need blocking.

I'm encouraged by this draft, although I'm more sure about Lichtensteiger
than Clady, if the truth is known. I think Licky is going to be a larger edition
of Nalen: mean, nasty, and powerful. Only Licky is 310 lbs. instead of 286.

Clady has dynamite measurables and talent. But so did Foster. We'll just
have to see what kind of organ is pumping beneath Clady's rib cage and
whether he can develop Lepsis-type nasties.

Kuper is a stud, IMO, and Holland became better as the season wore on
last year . . . these are two 300+ pound players.

Back to Torain: He seems to have Henry's type of power, but he can blow
Henry's doors off in top end speed. When I started reading the comments
about his starting early as this year, I thought that was ridiculous . . .
every player from the draft is a superstar out of the chute. I also remember
he didn't do much in the UA game (but then, he was playing across from the
excellent UA linebackers, who included Spencer Larsen).

But after reading up on Torain and seeing some of his highlights and his pro
day workout, as well as hearing some comments about him from the
"experts," I'm beginning to see the possibility.

But he needs blocking. If we don't have that, we won't see a good Torain.


That, my friend, was a masterful job of rambling. :laugh:

-----

Lonestar
04-30-2008, 01:28 PM
I don't think the problem was Henry, JR, or anywhere with the RBs. It is
with the O-line (and I think I'm preaching to the choir in you). If Denver's
running scheme is working, my wife could get yardage. The Broncos have a
stable of good . . . not great, but good . . . running backs, and that is all
they need.

They need blocking.

I'm encouraged by this draft, although I'm more sure about Lichtensteiger
than Clady, if the truth is known. I think Licky is going to be a larger edition
of Nalen: mean, nasty, and powerful. Only Licky is 310 lbs. instead of 286.

Clady has dynamite measurables and talent. But so did Foster. We'll just
have to see what kind of organ is pumping beneath Clady's rib cage and
whether he can develop Lepsis-type nasties.

Kuper is a stud, IMO, and Holland became better as the season wore on
last year . . . these are two 300+ pound players.

Back to Torain: He seems to have Henry's type of power, but he can blow
Henry's doors off in top end speed. When I started reading the comments
about his starting early as this year, I thought that was ridiculous . . .
every player from the draft is a superstar out of the chute. I also remember
he didn't do much in the UA game (but then, he was playing across from the
excellent UA linebackers, who included Spencer Larsen).

But after reading up on Torain and seeing some of his highlights and his pro
day workout, as well as hearing some comments about him from the
"experts," I'm beginning to see the possibility.

But he needs blocking. If we don't have that, we won't see a good Torain.


That, my friend, was a masterful job of rambling. :laugh:

-----

I'm going to start calling you Nash.

MY point was at the beginning of the year everyone was on thenry nuts about leading the league in yards..

Yes he did until he was hurts but they were weak sister defenses he ran against.

I'm coming around to the draft even though once again mikey did not listen to one word of my thoughts.. For that matter 99% of the posters thoughts on who needed to be brought in..

Lets hope these players drafted do not turn into the pre 2005 DAFTEES.. That he had wished and hoped they would all be another TD in the raw..

At least this year none of the commentators said WHO? When our picks were announced a HUGE step forward over past years IMO..

TXBRONC
04-30-2008, 06:35 PM
He actually had 4.7 speed, which is one of the reasons he lasted so long in the draft. That, and an injury history. He was just one of those players that played a lot faster in pads than his 40 times suggest. He wasn't a burner like Portis or Tater, but he hit the hole so fast that often times he was into the second level before defenders had a chance to adjust thier angles and chase.

Also TD played behind Garrrison Hearst.

gobroncsnv
04-30-2008, 06:46 PM
The 35 yards that Henry had in his first 4 games was against the Jags... We couldn't block them to save our lives. With a better oline, who knows???

TXBRONC
04-30-2008, 06:53 PM
He definately did. The only one that comes to mind (and I know there were more) was him high stepping through a leg tackle (probably a safety, but could have been an LB) around 15-20 past the LOS.

In 'rough' categories, I tend to place backs in three groups:

Bigger and/or slower backs (Ron Dayne) that can often get to the second level, but rarely get past the LBs without breaking a tackle. If they do get past, they are often run down from behind.

Mid sized and or quicker backs (Mike Bell) that given a crease has enough burst to get to the second level and past the LBs, but is often caught from behind or more often a safety/corner will force him out of bounds taking an angle route.

Fast (Portis/Bell) that if they get daylight in front of them, they are gone. Rarely do they get caught/stoppped once they have daylight in front of them.

I am guessing that Torain is in that middle group, which can still be VERY productive, but isn't as exciting as the guy that can score any time he touches the ball.

I hate to say it, but it has been so long since I watched TD play, that my memory is fuzzy. I think he fell somewhere between my middle and fast group. He didn't have blazing speed (40 time), but did have good football speed and often took it to the house if he made it clear of the LBs.

I would guess the same thing, that Torain is in that middle group.

Lonestar
04-30-2008, 10:38 PM
The 35 yards that Henry had in his first 4 games was against the Jags... We couldn't block them to save our lives. With a better oline, who knows???

until late sometime next year when this OLINE jells will we be able to run on the Jags they held him to 35 yards for a reason..

Tned
05-01-2008, 07:58 AM
until late sometime next year when this OLINE jells will we be able to run on the Jags they held him to 35 yards for a reason..

Why would it take until late next year for the O-line to gel?

Yes, while some pieces have moved in and out with injury, all the players with the exception of Clady (if he wins the LT or RT spot) will have quite a bit of experience on the line.

Right now, best guess is the O-line will be:

Clady
Hamilton
Nalen
Holland
Kuper

with the exception of Clady, that line shouldn't take very long to gel, because they all have quite a bit of experience working together. Yes, Kuper has moved around, and mostly played guard last year, and it could easily be pears or harris at RT (pears has been playing LT or RT for almost two years).

With the exception of rookie growing pains from Clady, there is no reason that this line can't 'gel' in OTA's and training camp + Pre-season games.

MOtorboat
05-01-2008, 08:50 AM
Why would it take until late next year for the O-line to gel?

Yes, while some pieces have moved in and out with injury, all the players with the exception of Clady (if he wins the LT or RT spot) will have quite a bit of experience on the line.

Right now, best guess is the O-line will be:

Clady
Hamilton
Nalen
Holland
Kuper

with the exception of Clady, that line shouldn't take very long to gel, because they all have quite a bit of experience working together. Yes, Kuper has moved around, and mostly played guard last year, and it could easily be pears or harris at RT (pears has been playing LT or RT for almost two years).

With the exception of rookie growing pains from Clady, there is no reason that this line can't 'gel' in OTA's and training camp + Pre-season games.

Hamilton and Nalen have played together for a long time, and Holland is a veteran who played next to Nalen for a time last year...and Kuper isn't new to the line. The only new component is Clady. I hate the term "gelling" anyway.

claymore
05-01-2008, 09:05 AM
Hamilton and Nalen have played together for a long time, and Holland is a veteran who played next to Nalen for a time last year...and Kuper isn't new to the line. The only new component is Clady. I hate the term "gelling" anyway.Quit kissing Niners butt. Gel is a legitimate term. :coffee:

Lonestar
05-01-2008, 01:12 PM
Why would it take until late next year for the O-line to gel?

Yes, while some pieces have moved in and out with injury, all the players with the exception of Clady (if he wins the LT or RT spot) will have quite a bit of experience on the line.

Right now, best guess is the O-line will be:

Clady
Hamilton
Nalen
Holland
Kuper

with the exception of Clady, that line shouldn't take very long to gel, because they all have quite a bit of experience working together. Yes, Kuper has moved around, and mostly played guard last year, and it could easily be pears or harris at RT (pears has been playing LT or RT for almost two years).

With the exception of rookie growing pains from Clady, there is no reason that this line can't 'gel' in OTA's and training camp + Pre-season games.


if that is the OLINE this year it means we have at least TWO players playing new position with 4 players having someone new next to them..

Also Nalen and Holland had but a few games next to each other this past year..

Most really good OLINE take years to get into sync, look at how good the KC line was for almost a decade with no changes..

I think we are asking alot of jelling to happen to early mid year at best. And that is IF clady can pick up the playbook by then.

I do not see it happening that fast and I really believe that it will be Harris at RT not Kuper I could be wrong here. We also have to factor in the Hamilton and Nalen situation in can they really play at the same level they have been in yeas past or is it time to make a wholesale change.. Get it done now and not have to make changes next year..

Food for thought.. I do not see this OLINE beign great till mid year at best and then there will be missed assignements..

I used to play OG and having a new player next to me slowed me down because I had to think about what he was going to do it was not automatic.. OUR offense was not nearly as complicated as mikeys playbook..

TXBRONC
05-01-2008, 09:13 PM
Why would it take until late next year for the O-line to gel?

Yes, while some pieces have moved in and out with injury, all the players with the exception of Clady (if he wins the LT or RT spot) will have quite a bit of experience on the line.

Right now, best guess is the O-line will be:

Clady
Hamilton
Nalen
Holland
Kuper

with the exception of Clady, that line shouldn't take very long to gel, because they all have quite a bit of experience working together. Yes, Kuper has moved around, and mostly played guard last year, and it could easily be pears or harris at RT (pears has been playing LT or RT for almost two years).

With the exception of rookie growing pains from Clady, there is no reason that this line can't 'gel' in OTA's and training camp + Pre-season games.


Exactly, as of right now our we'll have our two most experienced interior linemen back. Kuper has played tackle for us but he did in college and he already has year's experience playing at stater so realistically we only have one new lineman that being Clady.

Scarface
05-02-2008, 11:31 PM
http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff302/ScarfaceBroncos2007/NFL%20Draft%2008/RB/610x-2.jpg


I think he's got first-round ability, I will say that ... I really put the whammy on him. Any time I say a guy's got first-round ability, he probably has no chance at all. But I really do believe he's that type of tailback. Time will tell. -Mike Shanahan

http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff302/ScarfaceBroncos2007/NFL%20Draft%2008/RB/1351714379_f499c6b809.jpg

TXBRONC
05-02-2008, 11:36 PM
http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff302/ScarfaceBroncos2007/NFL%20Draft%2008/RB/610x-2.jpg



http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff302/ScarfaceBroncos2007/NFL%20Draft%2008/RB/1351714379_f499c6b809.jpg

He's not the fastest back in the world but I still like all of his measurables.

Npba900
05-04-2008, 09:54 AM
The way some of us are reacting with Mike taking Rayan Torain, one would think Shanahan took this with his 2nd pick!:laugh:

However, the way I see it, Torain sure seems to have had the same college career at Arizona that TD had a Georgia, when you consider both players were plagued with injuries.

Like TD, there isn't much footage (you tube) on Torain as well, except for a you tube video of his NFL workout....which in my opinion I was impressed with his footwork and his pass catching ability. Check it out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfU-U3VmTX4&NR=1

Lastly, would it not be interesting if both Torain and TD had similar scouting and draft analyst grade outs.

Who the hell knows at this point whether Torain is a bust or a 1500 to 1600 yard rusher in his rookie year. Perhaps Torain even puts up TD rookie rushing records. I understand Torain is a great character person, and that's important...after all so was TD when he was drafted. Another comparable rap both TD and Torain had coming out of college were there inability to get around the corner and their slooooow 40 times.

Hopefully, Torain will have TD's game day speed, drive and perseverance and everything should work out just fine.

Here's to you Torain, WELCOME ABOARD.....good luck, and may you enjoy a couple of Pro Bowl selections, few Lombardi Trophies on your way to the HOF.:welcome:

Ziggy
05-04-2008, 10:08 AM
The way some of us are reacting with Mike taking Rayan Torain, one would think Shanahan took this with his 2nd pick!:laugh:

However, the way I see it, Torain sure seems to have had the same college career at Arizona that TD had a Georgia, when you consider both players were plagued with injuries.

Like TD, there isn't much footage (you tube) on Torain as well, except for a you tube video of his NFL workout....which in my opinion I was impressed with his footwork and his pass catching ability. Check it out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfU-U3VmTX4&NR=1

Lastly, would it not be interesting if both Torain and TD had similar scouting and draft analyst grade outs.

Who the hell knows at this point whether Torain is a bust or a 1500 to 1600 yard rusher in his rookie year. Perhaps Torain even puts up TD rookie rushing records. I understand Torain is a great character person, and that's important...after all so was TD when he was drafted. Another comparable rap both TD and Torain had coming out of college were there inability to get around the corner and their slooooow 40 times.
Hopefully, Torain will have TD's game day speed, drive and perseverance and everything should work out just fine.

Here's to you Torain, WELCOME ABOARD.....good luck, and may you enjoy a couple of Pro Bowl selections, few Lombardi Trophies on your way to the HOF.:welcome:

Torain actually ran a 4.5 40, which is very good speed for a back his size. TD ran a 4.7, but it didn't matter, because by the time the defenders began getting an angle on him, he had 2-3 steps on them. Think about it. A 4.4 40 and a 4.7 40 means that one player is .3 seconds faster over a 40 yard distance. How many steps can you take in .3 seconds? 1 if you're lucky. Like I said before, TD hit the hole so fast that he often had 2-3 steps on defenders before they could take the proper angle and pursue.

40 times are highly overrated, and they don't tell us what a players speed in pads are. If they had them run the 40's in full pads, I would care a little bit more about what they were, but they don't. While 1 player runs a 4.4 in shorts, and another runs a 4.7 in shorts, they may both run a 4.8 in pads. Football speed is all that matters.

Npba900
05-04-2008, 10:11 AM
Good Points Ziggy.

underrated29
05-04-2008, 04:28 PM
UMMM........ somebody said it on like page 3, but AP and marshawn lynch arent worlds ahead of dmac and stewart.

AP of course is going to be an allstar (injury free i hope).

Lynch on the other hand is a great rb, but stewart owns him. I would even venture to say that rashard might be better. Rashard is faster, but not as strong.

I would take stewie or mendenhall above lynch.

Tned
05-05-2008, 08:55 PM
I heard on Sirus NFL Radio (the guys on at the 5:00 hour -- central time, before Total Access comes on) them talking about Torain. A guy from Denver called in and asked about the Lisfranc injury and about Torain in general.

They said that in general they are serious injuries, especially with your skill players who have to make sharp cuts and turns, so they hope the team gives it plenty of time to heal and not push him.

They also said that they weren't to hot on the pick until they spoke to Pat Carrol, and now think that he could turn out to be a good back (don't remember their exact words).

They went on to say that they thought Denver was a team trying to find an offensive identity and that the fans might have to get used to them no longer being a dominant team, as the Alex Gibbs O-line and style of play is dissapearing. They said that bringing in guys like Clady that will help with the pass offense is going to help in the pass game, but probably hurt them in the quick hitting rush offense, the way the O-line used to collapse down on the ends on the back side.

They also said that people shouldn't discount how the change in QB, no matter how much potential and with the great arm, has effected the run game, because the ends no longer fear the QB rolling out on the back side of the play, which kept them from crashing down and stuffing the run.

Anyway, they went on to say that the Broncos are going to have to learn to be less reliant on the run and more balanced in all aspects of the offense, as they lose their run dominance.

Anyway, I know not all of this is related to Torain, but that is the context they brought it up in. They were saying he likely has a good future, if healthy, but that the broncos fans should be prepared to not have the dominant run game of years past.

Sorry for the choppy report, but I listened to it 3 hours ago and am trying to get across the gist of their comments.

Lonestar
05-05-2008, 09:08 PM
I heard on Sirus NFL Radio (the guys on at the 5:00 hour -- central time, before Total Access comes on) them talking about Torain. A guy from Denver called in and asked about the Lisfranc injury and about Torain in general.

They said that in general they are serious injuries, especially with your skill players who have to make sharp cuts and turns, so they hope the team gives it plenty of time to heal and not push him.

They also said that they weren't to hot on the pick until they spoke to Pat Carrol, and now think that he could turn out to be a good back (don't remember their exact words).

They went on to say that they thought Denver was a team trying to find an offensive identity and that the fans might have to get used to them no longer being a dominant team, as the Alex Gibbs O-line and style of play is dissapearing. They said that bringing in guys like Clady that will help with the pass offense is going to help in the pass game, but probably hurt them in the quick hitting rush offense, the way the O-line used to collapse down on the ends on the back side.

They also said that people shouldn't discount how the change in QB, no matter how much potential and with the great arm, has effected the run game, because the ends no longer fear the QB rolling out on the back side of the play, which kept them from crashing down and stuffing the run.

Anyway, they went on to say that the Broncos are going to have to learn to be less reliant on the run and more balanced in all aspects of the offense, as they lose their run dominance.

Anyway, I know not all of this is related to Torain, but that is the context they brought it up in. They were saying he likely has a good future, if healthy, but that the broncos fans should be prepared to not have the dominant run game of years past.

Sorry for the choppy report, but I listened to it 3 hours ago and am trying to get across the gist of their comments.


yet it makes more sense than most of what I have heard, I had not thought about the roll out being an aide to the running game.. so even though we had lots of injuries last year those were not the only reasons for our ineptitude.

hopefully mikey the mastermind will find something else to exploit..

Ziggy
05-05-2008, 09:28 PM
They had Dennis Erickson on 950 AM today, and asked him about Torain. He said that he thinks he will really contribute to this Denver offense and be a quality NFL back. He thinks Denver got a steal. When they asked what type of RB he was, Erickson said that he makes good cuts, can run over people, and run away from them.

TXBRONC
05-05-2008, 09:37 PM
They had Dennis Erickson on 950 AM today, and asked him about Torain. He said that he thinks he will really contribute to this Denver offense and be a quality NFL back. He thinks Denver got a steal. When they asked what type of RB he was, Erickson said that he makes good cuts, can run over people, and run away from them.

He looks like a power back. I wonder how good his pass catching skill are?

Requiem / The Dagda
05-05-2008, 09:43 PM
He looks like a power back. I wonder how good his pass catching skill are?

Pretty solid TX!

slim
05-05-2008, 09:47 PM
He looks like a power back. I wonder how good his pass catching skill are?

He can catch pretty well.

topscribe
05-05-2008, 09:54 PM
yet it makes more sense than most of what I have heard, I had not thought about the roll out being an aide to the running game.. so even though we had lots of injuries last year those were not the only reasons for our ineptitude.

hopefully mikey the mastermind will find something else to exploit..

If I were they, I would still incorporate the rollout. Cutler is very mobile . . .
more mobile than people think, and he is capable of maintaining that fear in
the defense. In fact, that 65-yard flip to Walker was a rollout to the left.
And that 30-some-odd yard run last year demonstrated he can take off and
do considerable damage. I believe they would be silly to abandon it.

As you have pointed out elsewhere, the effectiveness of a RB, be it Torain
or anyone else, depends on how much the defense fears the other aspects
of the offense.

-----

TXBRONC
05-05-2008, 09:58 PM
If I were they, I would still incorporate the rollout. Cutler is very mobile . . .
more mobile than people think, and he is capable of maintaining that fear in
the defense. In fact, that 65-yard flip to Walker was a rollout to the left.
And that 30-some-odd yard run last year demonstrated he can take off and
do considerable damage. I believe they would be silly to abandon it.

-----

I remember hearing that Jay had a quarterback rating well over a 100 when he was outside the pocket last season.

WARHORSE
05-05-2008, 10:01 PM
I heard on Sirus NFL Radio (the guys on at the 5:00 hour -- central time, before Total Access comes on) them talking about Torain. A guy from Denver called in and asked about the Lisfranc injury and about Torain in general.

They said that in general they are serious injuries, especially with your skill players who have to make sharp cuts and turns, so they hope the team gives it plenty of time to heal and not push him.

They also said that they weren't to hot on the pick until they spoke to Pat Carrol, and now think that he could turn out to be a good back (don't remember their exact words).

They went on to say that they thought Denver was a team trying to find an offensive identity and that the fans might have to get used to them no longer being a dominant team, as the Alex Gibbs O-line and style of play is dissapearing. They said that bringing in guys like Clady that will help with the pass offense is going to help in the pass game, but probably hurt them in the quick hitting rush offense, the way the O-line used to collapse down on the ends on the back side.

They also said that people shouldn't discount how the change in QB, no matter how much potential and with the great arm, has effected the run game, because the ends no longer fear the QB rolling out on the back side of the play, which kept them from crashing down and stuffing the run.

Anyway, they went on to say that the Broncos are going to have to learn to be less reliant on the run and more balanced in all aspects of the offense, as they lose their run dominance.

Anyway, I know not all of this is related to Torain, but that is the context they brought it up in. They were saying he likely has a good future, if healthy, but that the broncos fans should be prepared to not have the dominant run game of years past.

Sorry for the choppy report, but I listened to it 3 hours ago and am trying to get across the gist of their comments.

Sorry to disagree with them, but it was Mike Shanahan that brought that in here and keeps it here. The only reason we used smaller OTs and Olinemen is because they were more mobile. But Shanahan said himself that we WANT bigger olinemen, its just hard to find larger guys that are mobile enough to run what we do. Meet Ryan Clady and the boyz. What scheme did Clady run in Boise? The ZBS. Mike Shanahan, is NOT going to give up anything in the run game. If he were, Im sure he would try to bring in a back that runs in a more conventional blocking scheme. Torain is proof that we arent changing anything, cause MS said he 'fits what we do.' He is a NS runner with speed and bruising strength.


Ends no longer fear the rollout?? LOL! Did I miss something here? Did we remove the rollout from our playbook? Cutler, with his arm AND mobility, are even more of a rollout threat than ever. Unlike Plummer, they cant focus on taking away one aspect of the offense to force us into another because we do them ALL well with Cutlers arm under center. They took the boot away from Jake because that was what he was best at. Forcing him to be a pocket passer, which he wasnt the best at. Cutler can do it all, and that includes when Shanny sees the ends crashing in order to try and stop the run, you better believe hes going to be running the bootleg plays to great efficiency.

Balance has always been the target for Mike Shanahans offenses. It forces teams to defend it ALL. The oline is where it all begins, and we can only hope that this oline lives up to just a hint of its potential, cause dominance at the LOS in this offense means bad days for opposing defenses when you have the weapons that we have, beginning with Cutler.


Expect a dominant run game? If we have balance, you better believe we will be closing out games with the run.

Frankly, I think these guys should look for new jobs, or stick to teams they know.

Tned
05-05-2008, 10:05 PM
yet it makes more sense than most of what I have heard, I had not thought about the roll out being an aide to the running game.. so even though we had lots of injuries last year those were not the only reasons for our ineptitude.

hopefully mikey the mastermind will find something else to exploit..

That is part of what I have been saying about Heimerdinger's changing the offense being the biggest cause of the offensive failure.

While Jay is not as mobile as Jake, he isn't a statue. Much of the movement and misdirection that was used with Jake, could be used with Jay. However, Heimerdinger was brought in (yes, Shanny's fault) to bring a new dimension to the passing game, but somehow they lost site of how the movement in the passing game opened up the running game.

In some of my other threads where I have talked about hoping that Shanahan takes back over the offense and gets back to some of his basics, this is what I am referring to.

dogfish
05-05-2008, 10:08 PM
They went on to say that they thought Denver was a team trying to find an offensive identity and that the fans might have to get used to them no longer being a dominant team, as the Alex Gibbs O-line and style of play is dissapearing. They said that bringing in guys like Clady that will help with the pass offense is going to help in the pass game, but probably hurt them in the quick hitting rush offense, the way the O-line used to collapse down on the ends on the back side.

They also said that people shouldn't discount how the change in QB, no matter how much potential and with the great arm, has effected the run game, because the ends no longer fear the QB rolling out on the back side of the play, which kept them from crashing down and stuffing the run.

Anyway, they went on to say that the Broncos are going to have to learn to be less reliant on the run and more balanced in all aspects of the offense, as they lose their run dominance.




i call major BS on those guys. . . :tsk:

top's right, cutler was an option QB early in his college career-- his mobility is just FINE. . . tough for him to be successful running the bootleg when frickin' shanahan won't call the plays, though. . .


that's also a steaming pile that we won't be able to have a dominant rushing attck without gibbs-- as good as he was, he's not the only guy in the NFL who can put together a good run blocking line! granted, we may not be able to do it with late round picks and UDFAs the way we used to, but if we invest in the line we can still cram it down people's throats. . . that's the reason i would have taken branden albert over clady-- he might not have quite as much experience outside, but clady's raw himself, and albert has the skillset to be just about as good in pass pro (clady's ceiling there may be a bit higher)-- and he comes in as a much nastier run blocker. . .

TXBRONC
05-05-2008, 10:10 PM
That is part of what I have been saying about Heimerdinger's changing the offense being the biggest cause of the offensive failure.

While Jay is not as mobile as Jake, he isn't a statue. Much of the movement and misdirection that was used with Jake, could be used with Jay. However, Heimerdinger was brought in (yes, Shanny's fault) to bring a new dimension to the passing game, but somehow they lost site of how the movement in the passing game opened up the running game.

In some of my other threads where I have talked about hoping that Shanahan takes back over the offense and gets back to some of his basics, this is what I am referring to.

I think you'll still see Shanahan using mutiple receiver sets. When Jake was brought into Denver he got away from it, but with Jay's skill sets it's a viable thing to do provide the protection holds up.

Tned
05-05-2008, 10:15 PM
Ends no longer fear the rollout?? LOL! Did I miss something here? Did we remove the rollout from our playbook? Cutler, with his arm AND mobility, are even more of a rollout threat than ever. Unlike Plummer, they cant focus on taking away one aspect of the offense to force us into another because we do them ALL well with Cutlers arm under center. They took the boot away from Jake because that was what he was best at. Forcing him to be a pocket passer, which he wasnt the best at. Cutler can do it all, and that includes when Shanny sees the ends crashing in order to try and stop the run, you better believe hes going to be running the bootleg plays to great efficiency.

Yes, to a VERY large extent we took away the rollouts. Often when Jay ran them, they were VERY tight rollouts, almost staying in the pocket. He had some wide rolls, but far fewer than in years past. Also, when he rolled, he usually was going for the bomb, which was usually picked or incomplete, rather than in the past the rollout was used to either run for a first down or throw to a crossing tight end, and only sometimes go deep (yes take a shot at Jake's arm, but that will be missing the point of the effectiveness it used to have in making ends honor the backside of the play).


Balance has always been the target for Mike Shanahans offenses. It forces teams to defend it ALL. The oline is where it all begins, and we can only hope that this oline lives up to just a hint of its potential, cause dominance at the LOS in this offense means bad days for opposing defenses when you have the weapons that we have, beginning with Cutler.

Actually, no. Shanny has run a 50/50 type offense (50% runs), which is typically only surpassed by Pitt. That isn't balanced in NFL terms, that is being VERY run heavy.

Also, while I think his 50/50 (run heavy) approach was effective in the past, it was due to misdirection. The misdirection came from confusing the defensive packages with new formations each week; the ZBS cut blocking opening up cut back lanes and RBs knowing how to use them; and, the QB being mobile and forcing an end or someone else to protect against the QB scrambling for an easy first down.

There is much more to it, but it was all about misdirection. That was almost completely gone the last two years, with Heimerdinger's influence. There was more shotgun. MUCH more straight, drop back passing, and more traditional play action, and less rollout, play action. With the line we had the last two years, injuries or not, this more traditional run and pass game was simply not playing to the strength of the O-line.


[COLOR=white]Expect a dominant run game? If we have balance, you better believe we will be closing out games with the run.

Frankly, I think these guys should look for new jobs, or stick to teams they know.

If Shanahan, after ending the failed Heimerdinger experiment, gets back to running the offense that he and Kubiak ran so effectively for 12 or so years, than I agree it can once again be a dominant run game. However, I can certainly understand the analysts, because they are able to see that the last two years has NOT been the Shanny/Kubiak offense, so the reasonable thing to assume is that the team is changing their focus, hence their statements about it being an offense trying to figure itself out.

Tned
05-05-2008, 10:18 PM
i call major BS on those guys. . . :tsk:

top's right, cutler was an option QB early in his college career-- his mobility is just FINE. . . tough for him to be successful running the bootleg when frickin' shanahan won't call the plays, though. . .

.

I agree, but the Broncos haven't used him that way the last two years. Beyond that, In Jake's final season (the 11 games), they didn't use HIM that way anymore, either. Heimerdinger was brought in to open up the passing game. What he did was bring in a traditional passing game, which result in a traditional running game, and our o-line failed miserably as a result.

If Shannahan gets back to using his mobile QBs as MOBILE QBs, then I don't doubt that the offense can start firing again. However, the offense didn't just stall by chance the last two years, the basics of it were changed and it did not fit the personell on the field.

Lonestar
05-05-2008, 10:27 PM
Sorry to disagree with them, but it was Mike Shanahan that brought that in here and keeps it here. The only reason we used smaller OTs and Olinemen is because they were more mobile. But Shanahan said himself that we WANT bigger olinemen, its just hard to find larger guys that are mobile enough to run what we do. Meet Ryan Clady and the boyz. What scheme did Clady run in Boise? The ZBS. Mike Shanahan, is NOT going to give up anything in the run game. If he were, Im sure he would try to bring in a back that runs in a more conventional blocking scheme. Torain is proof that we arent changing anything, cause MS said he 'fits what we do.' He is a NS runner with speed and bruising strength.


Ends no longer fear the rollout?? LOL! Did I miss something here? Did we remove the rollout from our playbook? Cutler, with his arm AND mobility, are even more of a rollout threat than ever. Unlike Plummer, they cant focus on taking away one aspect of the offense to force us into another because we do them ALL well with Cutlers arm under center. They took the boot away from Jake because that was what he was best at. Forcing him to be a pocket passer, which he wasnt the best at. Cutler can do it all, and that includes when Shanny sees the ends crashing in order to try and stop the run, you better believe hes going to be running the bootleg plays to great efficiency.

Balance has always been the target for Mike Shanahans offenses. It forces teams to defend it ALL. The oline is where it all begins, and we can only hope that this oline lives up to just a hint of its potential, cause dominance at the LOS in this offense means bad days for opposing defenses when you have the weapons that we have, beginning with Cutler.


Expect a dominant run game? If we have balance, you better believe we will be closing out games with the run.

Frankly, I think these guys should look for new jobs, or stick to teams they know.


I think that mikey has always wanted big, smart and fast with good feet just was not willing to pay for them. So he settled for the smaller ones, because they were available late and for the most part much cheaper than day one picks at least for the rookie parts of their contracts....

Remember he brought in Zimmerman when he first got here when FA was in it infancy at a good price.. after that BIG great OLTs just were not in the budget.. He tired with foster only to find out he was NOT Zimmerman..

Jay will never be the snake for getting out of tight spots, but he has the arm that Jake did not..

other than that most of your post is pretty much dead on..

honz
05-05-2008, 10:36 PM
Cutler is still pretty mobile, though...especially for his size. He has a knack for escaping sacks and somehow making a play out of nothing.

MOtorboat
05-05-2008, 10:49 PM
Cutler is still pretty mobile, though...especially for his size. He has a knack for escaping sacks and somehow making a play out of nothing.

Cutler will be fine. He's mobile...that won't change.

The offseason is full of over-exaggerations and worries.

red98
05-05-2008, 10:59 PM
Remember he brought in Zimmerman when he first got here

Just an FYI, Zim was aquired in 1993....

honz
05-05-2008, 11:11 PM
Cutler will be fine. He's mobile...that won't change.

The offseason is full of over-exaggerations and worries.
Yeah, I'm not saying that will change...I have just been drinking an felt like saying something.:beer:

Lonestar
05-06-2008, 12:36 AM
Just an FYI, Zim was aquired in 1993....

thanks

then mikey does not even get credit for that great move.. Zim was one of the very first FA classes when they were still a steal..

http://www.nfl.com/players/garyzimmerman/gamelogs?id=ZIM369148

HE did not even start in the NFL till 1991 was FA the year after.

http://www.nfl.com/players/garyzimmerman/careerstats?id=ZIM369148

dogfish
05-06-2008, 01:38 AM
thanks

then mikey does not even get credit for that great move.. Zim was one of the very first FA classes when they were still a steal..

http://www.nfl.com/players/garyzimmerman/gamelogs?id=ZIM369148

HE did not even start in the NFL till 1991 was FA the year after.

http://www.nfl.com/players/garyzimmerman/careerstats?id=ZIM369148

wow. . . i know it's NFL.com, but i don't think that's accurate. . . :shocked:


the vikings were my second favorite team back then (i've always appreciated teams built around the lines, and they were killer on both sides), and i sure seem to remember zim starting for them for more than two years-- he just destroyed people lining up next to OLG randall mcdaniel. . . one of the best left sides to ever play the game. . . either my memory's foggy, or he got a lot of playing time even though he wasn't starting those first few years. . . anyways. . .




:cheers:

WARHORSE
05-06-2008, 04:18 AM
Yes, to a VERY large extent we took away the rollouts. Often when Jay ran them, they were VERY tight rollouts, almost staying in the pocket. He had some wide rolls, but far fewer than in years past. Also, when he rolled, he usually was going for the bomb, which was usually picked or incomplete, rather than in the past the rollout was used to either run for a first down or throw to a crossing tight end, and only sometimes go deep (yes take a shot at Jake's arm, but that will be missing the point of the effectiveness it used to have in making ends honor the backside of the play).



Actually, no. Shanny has run a 50/50 type offense (50% runs), which is typically only surpassed by Pitt. That isn't balanced in NFL terms, that is being VERY run heavy.

Also, while I think his 50/50 (run heavy) approach was effective in the past, it was due to misdirection. The misdirection came from confusing the defensive packages with new formations each week; the ZBS cut blocking opening up cut back lanes and RBs knowing how to use them; and, the QB being mobile and forcing an end or someone else to protect against the QB scrambling for an easy first down.

There is much more to it, but it was all about misdirection. That was almost completely gone the last two years, with Heimerdinger's influence. There was more shotgun. MUCH more straight, drop back passing, and more traditional play action, and less rollout, play action. With the line we had the last two years, injuries or not, this more traditional run and pass game was simply not playing to the strength of the O-line.



If Shanahan, after ending the failed Heimerdinger experiment, gets back to running the offense that he and Kubiak ran so effectively for 12 or so years, than I agree it can once again be a dominant run game. However, I can certainly understand the analysts, because they are able to see that the last two years has NOT been the Shanny/Kubiak offense, so the reasonable thing to assume is that the team is changing their focus, hence their statements about it being an offense trying to figure itself out.

I agree about taking it out on our part, but not quite for what youre saying. You dont just rollout for the sake of it. We rolled Jake out more cause he couldnt stay in the pocket under pressure and make reads downfield. When youre rolling out, its easier to read the field and it also makes reading the pressure much easier: someone is either on you or not.....you either run, or pass. We just did more to get him outside the pocket cause that was where he was more effective. But the problem with that comes under a couple of conditions. One, youre behind, and they know youre going to pass, and play action is dead. There wont be any ends crashing when they know you arent going to pass. Two: youre run game isnt that special. When teams can stop the run with 7 in the box, you dont have to crash your ends, they play contain, which means if you rollout, you rollout right into a DE. How many times did you see Jay rollout only to find a DE in his face? With a dominating run game, you pick your poison. Dont crash the ends, we run under and over tackle. Crash your ends, we bootleg and roll with great effectiveness. Our run game simply was not scaring anyone last year. Think of TD years....when we dominate in the run, they have to crash on run downs: perfect for bootlegs and play action. We didnt take it out of our playcalling, the defenses and our strengths took it out of our playcalling. Selvin Young didnt scare anyone.

Balanced and run heavy in the superbowl years is what its about. Balanced doesnt mean you call the same amount of run plays as pass plays. Balanced means you can do it all effectively: run or pass. YOU pick your poison. YOU dictate what the defense has to defense, dependent on their strengths, or simply just making them defend the entire field by making them understand you can attack any part of it at any time.

As for the misdirection, yes, that is our calling card and the effective nature of the ZBS. But as for Dinger getting us away from that? I dont think so. Maybe a little. He was here when we won the superbowls.With Jake, the defenses took away the rollouts. You dont just keep calling them when they are dictating to you, and not you to them. What got us away from that was a young QB who was more comfortable in the shotgun than under center. It came from Cutlers mouth numerous times. Him saying hes telling the OC what he likes and what he doesnt, and how they were gettin to know one another. Cutler was calling for the shotgun more cause he was more comfortable from it, and could see the field better. This is not uncommon in first and second year QBs. SEE: John Elway. When you have to turn your back on the defense during play action, that second or so are huge to a young QB whos tryin to diagnose what the defense is doing.


If what Im saying is true, you'll not only see Jay in the shotgun this year, but under center more and more over the next two years. The run game must, and will I think, be there for him. You will not only see more bootlegs, but also audibles at the LOS.

Our offensive identity is the same.........it just isnt clicking. Thats my opinion........and heck, I reserve the right to be utterly and totally wrong.:coffee:


Or right.;)

WARHORSE
05-06-2008, 04:31 AM
I think that mikey has always wanted big, smart and fast with good feet just was not willing to pay for them. So he settled for the smaller ones, because they were available late and for the most part much cheaper than day one picks at least for the rookie parts of their contracts....

Remember he brought in Zimmerman when he first got here when FA was in it infancy at a good price.. after that BIG great OLTs just were not in the budget.. He tired with foster only to find out he was NOT Zimmerman..

Jay will never be the snake for getting out of tight spots, but he has the arm that Jake did not..

other than that most of your post is pretty much dead on..

I dont know. I dont remember a whole lot of Olinemen being available to us in the latter part of the drafts with that type of ability. But I do know this: We have a nice big, strong, athletic but young line that could really be special with some playing time together. I really believe that. Im eager to see them work together this year. :salute:

You know, that statement is true, but Jay is pretty darn good at getting out of trouble himself. Hes not an easy one to bring down.

Tned
05-06-2008, 06:55 AM
Cutler is still pretty mobile, though...especially for his size. He has a knack for escaping sacks and somehow making a play out of nothing.

Yes, Cutler has done a good job of escaping, which is a bigger reason for the relatively low sacks given up number last year (and the year before with Jake and Jay) than an indication of the lines pass blocking ability.


I agree about taking it out on our part, but not quite for what youre saying. You dont just rollout for the sake of it. We rolled Jake out more cause he couldnt stay in the pocket under pressure and make reads downfield. When youre rolling out, its easier to read the field and it also makes reading the pressure much easier: someone is either on you or not.....you either run, or pass. We just did more to get him outside the pocket cause that was where he was more effective.

I understand with what you are thinking and the conventional wisdom of "Jake was better out of the pocket...." and therefore they moved him. The problem with that is that in the 11 games he started in '06 after Heimerdinger took over the offense, Jake was moved out of the pocket FAR less than the previous three years he had been a starter in Denver. Coincidentally, the running game and passing game struggled greatly. The offense floundered. That floundering continued when Jay took over and last year.

This change in offensive play calling, a move to more drop back passing, more shotgun, more straight play action (drop back vs. rollout), started immediately following Heimerdinger taking over the offense and Jake was still the QB for 11 games of the '06 season.

It was a concious change in philosiphy (possibly prompted by knowing what their QB of the future's strengths were), not something that just happened when QB's changed.


But the problem with that comes under a couple of conditions. One, youre behind, and they know youre going to pass, and play action is dead. There wont be any ends crashing when they know you arent going to pass. Two: youre run game isnt that special. When teams can stop the run with 7 in the box, you dont have to crash your ends, they play contain, which means if you rollout, you rollout right into a DE. How many times did you see Jay rollout only to find a DE in his face? With a dominating run game, you pick your poison. Dont crash the ends, we run under and over tackle. Crash your ends, we bootleg and roll with great effectiveness. Our run game simply was not scaring anyone last year. Think of TD years....when we dominate in the run, they have to crash on run downs: perfect for bootlegs and play action. We didnt take it out of our playcalling, the defenses and our strengths took it out of our playcalling. Selvin Young didnt scare anyone.[/COLOR]

I agree completely with this. Hence the reason the team needs real balance. The AFCCG was a perfect example. In '05, the team was so reliant on the rollouts and play action, that when the team was behind in the second half and the run game was COMPLETELY incapable against Pitt's D, at one point they called something like 12 straight play action passes, with no runs in between. Pitt wasn't buying it and all it did was put the blockers at a disadvantage, because they first tried to 'sell' the run, before getting back on their heels to pass block. The Pitt defenders were just blowing by them.

So, again it goes to 'real' balance, and be able to do it all well, drop back passing, smash mouth running, rollout play action, etc. The AFCCG showed that the team was largely a one trick pony, so in the off season they brought in Heimerdinger to bring a new dimension to the pass game (google for Shanny's comments in that regard) as a reaction to the AFCCG.

However, in this case the last two years have shown a perfect example of the 'cure' being worse than the disease. Our 'fix' for what happened in the AFCCG was to call plays and run an offensive scheme that our line (and possibly other personell, like Jake) was not capable of executing properly, and the team's offense floundered.


Balanced and run heavy in the superbowl years is what its about. Balanced doesnt mean you call the same amount of run plays as pass plays. Balanced means you can do it all effectively: run or pass. YOU pick your poison. YOU dictate what the defense has to defense, dependent on their strengths, or simply just making them defend the entire field by making them understand you can attack any part of it at any time.

I don't disagree. The SB years are a perfect example of being truely balanced. The team could beat you with the run or pass, but could destroy you when both were working well. If a team was going to focus on TD, Elway would tear them apart. Or, vice versa.

However, this isn't that same team. This team isn't one that can just drop back and pass you apart in the passing game. This isn't a team that can run the football down your throat, even if you put 8 or 9 guys in the box.

So, Shanahan had overcome less talent with more creative call playing and deception/misdirection. That all went out the window when Kubiak left and Heimerdinger came in.


As for the misdirection, yes, that is our calling card and the effective nature of the ZBS. But as for Dinger getting us away from that? I dont think so. Maybe a little. He was here when we won the superbowls.With Jake, the defenses took away the rollouts. You dont just keep calling them when they are dictating to you, and not you to them. What got us away from that was a young QB who was more comfortable in the shotgun than under center. It came from Cutlers mouth numerous times. Him saying hes telling the OC what he likes and what he doesnt, and how they were gettin to know one another. Cutler was calling for the shotgun more cause he was more comfortable from it, and could see the field better. This is not uncommon in first and second year QBs. SEE: John Elway. When you have to turn your back on the defense during play action, that second or so are huge to a young QB whos tryin to diagnose what the defense is doing.

I completely disagree. The 'common' misonception is that the defense took it away. The teams got a 'blueprint' from Pitt. However, the problem with that 'theory' is that from the first game of the first season following the AFCCG, the Broncos ran a significantly different offense. Less boots, more drop back, more shotgun, etc. Day 1 following the AFCCG or of Heimerdinger's tenure.

For the "they took the rollouts away" to be a valid argument, which many have made, the team would have had to first attempt to run the offense that had racked up so many yards in previous years and then had teams actually stop them. Instead, at best there was a 'belief' that teams were going to stop and we proactively gave up on it.


If what Im saying is true, you'll not only see Jay in the shotgun this year, but under center more and more over the next two years. The run game must, and will I think, be there for him. You will not only see more bootlegs, but also audibles at the LOS.

Of course, because that is the concious change that has been made to the offense the last two years, both with Jake and Jay under center. However, Heimerdinger was tossed aside, but at the same time they are trying to bring in a bigger line.

So, I wouldn't be surprised for the 'change' in philosiphy to continue and try and get back to what the team was able to do in the SB years, but for that to work, the line has to continue to be upgraded and it is a big question whether or not there is enough to do it. If Clady works out immediately as a rookie LT, with Holland at RG and Kuper at RT, 'maybe' the team has a strong enough line to run a traditional passing game. Run shotgun's effectively, run multi-WR sets. I hope so, I would love to see the days of 'Elway' so to speak, back again, but the problem I have is that they attempted to do that the last two years with personell incapable of handling it, and I the results were a failure.

The coaches need to have the personell in place BEFORE changing an offensive philosiphy, not putting in O schemes bound to fail, because the players aren't suited to it.


Our offensive identity is the same.........it just isnt clicking. Thats my opinion........and heck, I reserve the right to be utterly and totally wrong.:coffee:


Or right.;)

If you have any games on tape, watch a handful of games from '05, then the first handful from '06, then the first handful from '07 and you will see 'clearly' that the offensive 'identity' is not the same. There was a marked and concious change in the offense that was/is being run. An OVERNIGHT (or offseason) change, not one that was gradually taken away by other team's defenses, but a reaction to what happened in one game, the AFCCG that happened to be the team best suited to stop the offense that was otherwise effective in '05 and '04.

TXBRONC
05-06-2008, 07:13 AM
wow. . . i know it's NFL.com, but i don't think that's accurate. . . :shocked:


the vikings were my second favorite team back then (i've always appreciated teams built around the lines, and they were killer on both sides), and i sure seem to remember zim starting for them for more than two years-- he just destroyed people lining up next to OLG randall mcdaniel. . . one of the best left sides to ever play the game. . . either my memory's foggy, or he got a lot of playing time even though he wasn't starting those first few years. . . anyways. . .



top, i give ya full marks for optimism, even if i strongly disagree with your assesment of our depth. . .


:cheers:


Zim spent about seven years in Minnesota if I remember correctly.

I just double checked, Zim did spend seven years with the Vikings and five years with us.

Scarface
05-06-2008, 07:34 AM
Yes, to a VERY large extent we took away the rollouts. Often when Jay ran them, they were VERY tight rollouts, almost staying in the pocket. He had some wide rolls, but far fewer than in years past. Also, when he rolled, he usually was going for the bomb, which was usually picked or incomplete, rather than in the past the rollout was used to either run for a first down or throw to a crossing tight end, and only sometimes go deep (yes take a shot at Jake's arm, but that will be missing the point of the effectiveness it used to have in making ends honor the backside of the play).



Actually, no. Shanny has run a 50/50 type offense (50% runs), which is typically only surpassed by Pitt. That isn't balanced in NFL terms, that is being VERY run heavy.

Also, while I think his 50/50 (run heavy) approach was effective in the past, it was due to misdirection. The misdirection came from confusing the defensive packages with new formations each week; the ZBS cut blocking opening up cut back lanes and RBs knowing how to use them; and, the QB being mobile and forcing an end or someone else to protect against the QB scrambling for an easy first down.

There is much more to it, but it was all about misdirection. That was almost completely gone the last two years, with Heimerdinger's influence. There was more shotgun. MUCH more straight, drop back passing, and more traditional play action, and less rollout, play action. With the line we had the last two years, injuries or not, this more traditional run and pass game was simply not playing to the strength of the O-line.



If Shanahan, after ending the failed Heimerdinger experiment, gets back to running the offense that he and Kubiak ran so effectively for 12 or so years, than I agree it can once again be a dominant run game. However, I can certainly understand the analysts, because they are able to see that the last two years has NOT been the Shanny/Kubiak offense, so the reasonable thing to assume is that the team is changing their focus, hence their statements about it being an offense trying to figure itself out.

We've always used the bootleg but with Plummer it was overused because of his inferior pocket passing skills. With Cutler we've gotten back to not having to try and fool the defense with bootlegs every other passing down. I don't think the dudes you were listening to have been paying that much attention to Denver Broncos football.

Ziggy
05-06-2008, 09:25 AM
Zim spent about seven years in Minnesota if I remember correctly.

I just double checked, Zim did spend seven years with the Vikings and five years with us.

Zim wasn't a free agent. We traded a 1st, 2nd, and 6th to get him. I beleive it was the GM that eventually went to the cards. Him name escapes me. It was 1994, and we also brought in Brian Habib that year in free agency. He was one of the more underrated guards in the NFL. That was the year that we really began building the great offensive line that would dominate games in later years.

edited: the GM was Bob Ferguson

WARHORSE
05-06-2008, 11:35 AM
Yes, Cutler has done a good job of escaping, which is a bigger reason for the relatively low sacks given up number last year (and the year before with Jake and Jay) than an indication of the lines pass blocking ability.



I understand with what you are thinking and the conventional wisdom of "Jake was better out of the pocket...." and therefore they moved him. The problem with that is that in the 11 games he started in '06 after Heimerdinger took over the offense, Jake was moved out of the pocket FAR less than the previous three years he had been a starter in Denver. Coincidentally, the running game and passing game struggled greatly. The offense floundered. That floundering continued when Jay took over and last year.

This change in offensive play calling, a move to more drop back passing, more shotgun, more straight play action (drop back vs. rollout), started immediately following Heimerdinger taking over the offense and Jake was still the QB for 11 games of the '06 season.

It was a concious change in philosiphy (possibly prompted by knowing what their QB of the future's strengths were), not something that just happened when QB's changed.



I agree completely with this. Hence the reason the team needs real balance. The AFCCG was a perfect example. In '05, the team was so reliant on the rollouts and play action, that when the team was behind in the second half and the run game was COMPLETELY incapable against Pitt's D, at one point they called something like 12 straight play action passes, with no runs in between. Pitt wasn't buying it and all it did was put the blockers at a disadvantage, because they first tried to 'sell' the run, before getting back on their heels to pass block. The Pitt defenders were just blowing by them.

So, again it goes to 'real' balance, and be able to do it all well, drop back passing, smash mouth running, rollout play action, etc. The AFCCG showed that the team was largely a one trick pony, so in the off season they brought in Heimerdinger to bring a new dimension to the pass game (google for Shanny's comments in that regard) as a reaction to the AFCCG.

However, in this case the last two years have shown a perfect example of the 'cure' being worse than the disease. Our 'fix' for what happened in the AFCCG was to call plays and run an offensive scheme that our line (and possibly other personell, like Jake) was not capable of executing properly, and the team's offense floundered.



I don't disagree. The SB years are a perfect example of being truely balanced. The team could beat you with the run or pass, but could destroy you when both were working well. If a team was going to focus on TD, Elway would tear them apart. Or, vice versa.

However, this isn't that same team. This team isn't one that can just drop back and pass you apart in the passing game. This isn't a team that can run the football down your throat, even if you put 8 or 9 guys in the box.

So, Shanahan had overcome less talent with more creative call playing and deception/misdirection. That all went out the window when Kubiak left and Heimerdinger came in.



I completely disagree. The 'common' misonception is that the defense took it away. The teams got a 'blueprint' from Pitt. However, the problem with that 'theory' is that from the first game of the first season following the AFCCG, the Broncos ran a significantly different offense. Less boots, more drop back, more shotgun, etc. Day 1 following the AFCCG or of Heimerdinger's tenure.

For the "they took the rollouts away" to be a valid argument, which many have made, the team would have had to first attempt to run the offense that had racked up so many yards in previous years and then had teams actually stop them. Instead, at best there was a 'belief' that teams were going to stop and we proactively gave up on it.



Of course, because that is the concious change that has been made to the offense the last two years, both with Jake and Jay under center. However, Heimerdinger was tossed aside, but at the same time they are trying to bring in a bigger line.

So, I wouldn't be surprised for the 'change' in philosiphy to continue and try and get back to what the team was able to do in the SB years, but for that to work, the line has to continue to be upgraded and it is a big question whether or not there is enough to do it. If Clady works out immediately as a rookie LT, with Holland at RG and Kuper at RT, 'maybe' the team has a strong enough line to run a traditional passing game. Run shotgun's effectively, run multi-WR sets. I hope so, I would love to see the days of 'Elway' so to speak, back again, but the problem I have is that they attempted to do that the last two years with personell incapable of handling it, and I the results were a failure.

The coaches need to have the personell in place BEFORE changing an offensive philosiphy, not putting in O schemes bound to fail, because the players aren't suited to it.



If you have any games on tape, watch a handful of games from '05, then the first handful from '06, then the first handful from '07 and you will see 'clearly' that the offensive 'identity' is not the same. There was a marked and concious change in the offense that was/is being run. An OVERNIGHT (or offseason) change, not one that was gradually taken away by other team's defenses, but a reaction to what happened in one game, the AFCCG that happened to be the team best suited to stop the offense that was otherwise effective in '05 and '04.

Before I go further, I appreciate the dialogue....especially because I understand your points and the validity. :beer:
My thoughts on the offensive change that came in with Dinger (more passing) are that Shanahan gave him some leeway, but kept him within 'what we do'. Afterall, Dinger just came from Tenn and NY where his offense moved off a conventional blocking scheme. For him to think he could come in and begin pocket passing in the ZBS I think was not lost on him. Hes too smart. But it may very well be that he wanted to show Shanny some of what he found to be successful in what he did when he was with those other teams. But Shanahan is far too observant to not notice what teams are trying to do to him defensively, while Dinger not quite as adept at it. I honestly think this is why Dinger is not here with us now. Not only did Shanny honestly think he had a better shot at a HC position there, but also, Shanahan doesnt like calling plays as the defense dictates to you what you can and cant do. He has an attacking offensive mindset, and I think he and Dinger had a few moments during games, even though they both greatly respect one another. Kubiak on the other hand, is EXACTLY like Shanahan in that same mindset, and therefore thrived here. Shanahan could let him run the offense cause Kubes knew what to do in Shanny eyes. What a loss for us, but great news for Kubiak. I do happen to believe the blueprint for Jake Plummer was set in the AFC Championship game. And although there WAS an offense change with Dinger, I still see defenses playing their DEs in containment the following year on Jake. Dont you find it curious that the offense took such a great jump in production once Cutler got under center, even with the same offense that Jake was in? Yet what did we see with Cutler? Almost immediately...........bootleg. More importantly....effective bootleg.

I like that you know what you see. Its not often I have a discussion in here where its that obvious. Honestly I think without a doubt, both positions have influenced our offense. Im looking forward to see if Slowick can handle being a Shanahan disciple. If he pays attention, he will learn a ton from Shanahan.

But no matter, and I agree.......either way, we will be seeing an offensive change with Dinger gone, and a better offensive line.:salute:

red98
05-06-2008, 12:15 PM
Zim wasn't a free agent. We traded a 1st, 2nd, and 6th to get him. I beleive it was the GM that eventually went to the cards. Him name escapes me. It was 1994, and we also brought in Brian Habib that year in free agency. He was one of the more underrated guards in the NFL. That was the year that we really began building the great offensive line that would dominate games in later years.

edited: the GM was Bob Ferguson

Both were aquired in 1993.

Ziggy
05-06-2008, 12:39 PM
Both were aquired in 1993.

You're right. The draft picks given up for Zim were in the 1st and 6th in 94 and 2nd in 95. Great trade for Denver.

dogfish
05-06-2008, 12:44 PM
You're right. The draft picks given up for Zim were in the 1st and 6th in 94 and 2nd in 95. Great trade for Denver.

almost unbelievable in retrospect-- what moron traded away a hall of fame left tackle??

Ziggy
05-06-2008, 12:48 PM
almost unbelievable in retrospect-- what moron traded away a hall of fame left tackle??

I don't know who the Vikings GM was, but Zim already had 4 pro bowls under his belt and was in his prime.

Skinny
05-06-2008, 12:54 PM
If i remember correctly, at the time, Zim was'nt happy in Minn. and wanted to be traded. He refused to go to camp and was a possible hold out. GM was kinda forced into trading him.

dogfish
05-06-2008, 01:06 PM
If i remember correctly, at the time, Zim was'nt happy in Minn. and wanted to be traded. He refused to go to camp and was a possible hold out. GM was kinda forced into trading him.




ahh, that would explain it-- thanks skinny!

TXBRONC
05-06-2008, 04:56 PM
almost unbelievable in retrospect-- what moron traded away a hall of fame left tackle??


Probably the same moron that traded away all of their draft picks for Herschel Walker.

TXBRONC
05-06-2008, 04:59 PM
Zim wasn't a free agent. We traded a 1st, 2nd, and 6th to get him. I beleive it was the GM that eventually went to the cards. Him name escapes me. It was 1994, and we also brought in Brian Habib that year in free agency. He was one of the more underrated guards in the NFL. That was the year that we really began building the great offensive line that would dominate games in later years.

edited: the GM was Bob Ferguson


Ok, but I didn't say he came here via free agency.

Tned
05-06-2008, 06:54 PM
Before I go further, I appreciate the dialogue....especially because I understand your points and the validity. :beer:
My thoughts on the offensive change that came in with Dinger (more passing) are that Shanahan gave him some leeway, but kept him within 'what we do'. Afterall, Dinger just came from Tenn and NY where his offense moved off a conventional blocking scheme. For him to think he could come in and begin pocket passing in the ZBS I think was not lost on him. Hes too smart. But it may very well be that he wanted to show Shanny some of what he found to be successful in what he did when he was with those other teams. But Shanahan is far too observant to not notice what teams are trying to do to him defensively, while Dinger not quite as adept at it. I honestly think this is why Dinger is not here with us now. Not only did Shanny honestly think he had a better shot at a HC position there, but also, Shanahan doesnt like calling plays as the defense dictates to you what you can and cant do. He has an attacking offensive mindset, and I think he and Dinger had a few moments during games, even though they both greatly respect one another. Kubiak on the other hand, is EXACTLY like Shanahan in that same mindset, and therefore thrived here. Shanahan could let him run the offense cause Kubes knew what to do in Shanny eyes. What a loss for us, but great news for Kubiak. I do happen to believe the blueprint for Jake Plummer was set in the AFC Championship game. And although there WAS an offense change with Dinger, I still see defenses playing their DEs in containment the following year on Jake. Dont you find it curious that the offense took such a great jump in production once Cutler got under center, even with the same offense that Jake was in? Yet what did we see with Cutler? Almost immediately...........bootleg. More importantly....effective bootleg.

I like that you know what you see. Its not often I have a discussion in here where its that obvious. Honestly I think without a doubt, both positions have influenced our offense. Im looking forward to see if Slowick can handle being a Shanahan disciple. If he pays attention, he will learn a ton from Shanahan.

But no matter, and I agree.......either way, we will be seeing an offensive change with Dinger gone, and a better offensive line.:salute:

One, I don't think it was a huge offensive jump. It went from horrific to bad.

I think a lot of what you describe as to the interaction between dinger and shanny and kubiak and shanny is probably dead on. However, the one place I see things different might be a chicken egg situation.

I see it as the fact that from game one of '06, the first game after the AFCCG, the Broncos ran a different offense, kept Jake in the pocket more, used more traditional play action, then boots, even shotgun quite a bit in one of the early games (can't remember specifically which one). I think the change we saw in the defenses was a result in the change in the offense, not the other way around.

Lonestar
05-06-2008, 07:33 PM
wow. . . i know it's NFL.com, but i don't think that's accurate. . . :shocked:


the vikings were my second favorite team back then (i've always appreciated teams built around the lines, and they were killer on both sides), and i sure seem to remember zim starting for them for more than two years-- he just destroyed people lining up next to OLG randall mcdaniel. . . one of the best left sides to ever play the game. . . either my memory's foggy, or he got a lot of playing time even though he wasn't starting those first few years. . . anyways. . .




:cheers:


I had thought at also but have seen very little on their web site that has been that far off.

When I saw it I thought is strange we would have taken someon in the league that long with only two years Satrting but back then MIN was the LOS capital of the World. I really had thought he had been a probowler a couple-3 years but since there was so little about on the NFL.com. Thought I was thinking of someone else.. and it was kinda late..

Lonestar
05-06-2008, 07:45 PM
I dont know. I dont remember a whole lot of Olinemen being available to us in the latter part of the drafts with that type of ability. But I do know this: We have a nice big, strong, athletic but young line that could really be special with some playing time together. I really believe that. Im eager to see them work together this year. :salute:

You know, that statement is true, but Jay is pretty darn good at getting out of trouble himself. Hes not an easy one to bring down.



The big fast smart OLT are rarely avail past ten or so.. one of the reason they are at a premium and in FA they cost a ton of money..

I know in my heart if a great one would have fell in his lap, fast feet, in the 325 range that is fast and smart the can be trained to do ZBS..

We settled for less because he was not willing to trade up to get one.. Up till now Lepsis was a pretty good OT better that anyone else be frankly not up to par with the top 5 guys.. EVEN before he was injured.. Pro bowls are not common for this OLINE because so few coaches, players or sport writers understand it and in ZBS overall it is a TEAM effort more than an individual one.. We could have had Anthony Munoz out there playing OLT last year, with the other injuries and lack of coordination down the LOS it may not have made a huge difference..

Scarface
05-06-2008, 07:53 PM
Anthony Munoz would have made a HUGE difference.

Lonestar
05-06-2008, 08:37 PM
Anthony Munoz would have made a HUGE difference.

I do not think with all the dis coordination on last years squad it would have.. As great as he was.. this OLINE last year struggle after Nalen went down and it only got worse when Hamilton bit it..

TXBRONC
05-06-2008, 08:50 PM
One, I don't think it was a huge offensive jump. It went from horrific to bad.

I think a lot of what you describe as to the interaction between dinger and shanny and kubiak and shanny is probably dead on. However, the one place I see things different might be a chicken egg situation.

I see it as the fact that from game one of '06, the first game after the AFCCG, the Broncos ran a different offense, kept Jake in the pocket more, used more traditional play action, then boots, even shotgun quite a bit in one of the early games (can't remember specifically which one). I think the change we saw in the defenses was a result in the change in the offense, not the other way around.


I really have never understood why some people call it a different offense. Dinger didn't bring in his own playbook. I may be wrong about this but when Shanahan brought in Dinger I was sure he said he want to open up more of the play book of coarse this just before we drafted Cutler as well.

That being said over the past two years that Dinger was here we never had a healthy offensive line. His first year Lepsis went down with knee injury and of coarse the last season we lost both Hamilton and Nalen to injury that sure doesn't help the cause.

Tned
05-06-2008, 08:54 PM
I really have never understood why some people call it a different offense. Dinger didn't bring in his own playbook. I may be wrong about this but when Shanahan brought in Dinger I was sure he said he want to open up more of the play book of coarse this just before we drafted Cutler as well.

That being said over the past two years that Dinger was here we never had a healthy offensive line. His first year Lepsis went down with knee injury and of coarse the last season we lost both Hamilton and Nalen to injury that sure doesn't help the cause.

Shanny said he wanted Heimerdinger to open up the passing game. What that means? Who knows.

The reason I say it was a different offense was because pretty much from the first snap of the '06 season, the play calling was much different than in '03, '04 and '05 when the Broncos were second only to Indy and the Pats in wins/losses and when the offense was clicking. Jumping out to quick leads, etc.

They got trounced in the AFCCG, brought in Heimerdinger and came out with much different play calling the very next regular season game, first game of '06, with much more drop back, straight play action, shotgun type play calling. Not even close to the play calling of the previous three years.

Tned
05-06-2008, 09:08 PM
I really have never understood why some people call it a different offense. Dinger didn't bring in his own playbook. I may be wrong about this but when Shanahan brought in Dinger I was sure he said he want to open up more of the play book of coarse this just before we drafted Cutler as well.

That being said over the past two years that Dinger was here we never had a healthy offensive line. His first year Lepsis went down with knee injury and of coarse the last season we lost both Hamilton and Nalen to injury that sure doesn't help the cause.

By the way, I went back to look, and I don't have a DVD of week one '06, but do of week 2. I started to watch it and after two off tackle runs, Simms started giving his keys to the game. He talked about how the Broncos needed to go back to the "Good Old Days" bootleg & run the ball. He said, "not a lot of success last week drop back passing".

So, while I don't have week one, Simms confirmed my memory, we came out week one and went immediately into drop back passing mode, something that the Broncos and their line were not used to nor suited to do.

Lonestar
05-06-2008, 09:10 PM
Shanny said he wanted Heimerdinger to open up the passing game. What that means? Who knows.

The reason I say it was a different offense was because pretty much from the first snap of the '06 season, the play calling was much different than in '03, '04 and '05 when the Broncos were second only to Indy and the Pats in wins/losses and when the offense was clicking. Jumping out to quick leads, etc.

They got trounced in the AFCCG, brought in Heimerdinger and came out with much different play calling the very next regular season game, first game of '06, with much more drop back, straight play action, shotgun type play calling. Not even close to the play calling of the previous three years.

They knew that with Jay coming in they wanted more Drop back pocket passing as that was his style with an arm.. Roll outs were not going to be his strong point and frankly he did not have to do so. Jake did for many reason.. They installed the drop back O from the play book that had been in the cobweb side to the playbook and thus when Mtn man said they were opening up the playbook to plays that Jake could not run it was ore of a he is not suited for them..

mikey wanted more vertical no doubt about it.. BUT IMO the OLINE had transformed from all pros on the Zimmerman line to the more finesse one we had last year. It was slow transition. over all of those years but it evolved from a great OLINE under Gibbs to what is got to last year with the mash unit playing on it..

Tned
05-06-2008, 09:23 PM
They knew that with Jay coming in they wanted more Drop back pocket passing as that was his style with an arm.. Roll outs were not going to be his strong point and frankly he did not have to do so. Jake did for many reason.. They installed the drop back O from the play book that had been in the cobweb side to the playbook and thus when Mtn man said they were opening up the playbook to plays that Jake could not run it was ore of a he is not suited for them..

mikey wanted more vertical no doubt about it.. BUT IMO the OLINE had transformed from all pros on the Zimmerman line to the more finesse one we had last year. It was slow transition. over all of those years but it evolved from a great OLINE under Gibbs to what is got to last year with the mash unit playing on it..

And when they started '06, with a healthy, but 'finesse' o-line and started attempting to run a drop back passing offense, the o-line couldn't handle it, even before the injuries (also seen in the AFCCG, when the Broncos couldn't run the ball and were left with pocket/play action passing).

My contention, one you will like because it casts blame on Shanny as well as Heimerdinger, is that the Assistant head coach - offense, OC and HC should know what their teams strengths and weaknesses are and shouldn't just decide that their line averaging around 290lbs was going to be able to stand up in a drop-back passing scheme, not to mention the fact it wasn't Jake's stength. So, you combine putting a QB in a passing scheme that isn't his strength and having Defensive players teeing off on him before or during every pass, because your O-line can't handle a drop back passing game?

I saw this and was screeming about it after the first game of '06.

Tned
05-06-2008, 09:47 PM
Ok, I was curious, so I went and checked my mania posts following week 1, 2006. I did a play by play breakdown of the game:


1. drop back, pass to Alexander left.
2. drop back, pass to Walker left sideline
3. drop back, pass intended for Scheffler, over back shoulder/behind him- incomplete
x sack given up by foster.
4. drop back, in defenders grasp, left handed underhand toss to M. bell completed
5. play action drop, over middle to Smith
x drop back, sack (beat mike Bell) - fumble
6. drop back, under pressure and back peddling, intended for Smith, intercepted, Smith had no play on ball
x. Playaction, boot leg left, sacked by unblocked DB.
7. Screen pass to M. Bell to right side.
8. Play action, straight drop, hit Smith at right numbers
9. screen to left, M. Bell
10. play action, straight drop, screen to Scheffler to left
11. straight drop, under pressure, spins out of sack, hits Alexander near left sideline

End of half Summary

Plummer 9-11 94 0/1 (td/ind) 64.4 (rating)
3 sacks
9 completions, all but one was well placed for receiver (the left handed flip was both ill advised and high)
2 incompletions, both bad throws (one was behind Scheffler, the other was intercepted and Smith had no play on the ball)
1 fumble (sack, Plummer never looked in direction of rusher and never saw the hit coming)


12. short drop, pass intended for Walker at left numbers on slant, throw low and off walkers hands
13. straight drop, short lob intended for walker on sideline who jumped over defender, pass bounced out of hands and off face mask, a little long.
14. short drop, pass intended for walker near left numbers on slant, pass hit Walker in hands and dropped.
x. straight drop, sacked by three defenders before reaching his 5 step drop point.
15. short drop. Short pass intended for Smith near left numbers, badly overthrown, no chance of being caught. (appeared to be mixup on what route was being run).
16. STraight drop, pass intended for Smith at right sideline, thrown behind smith
17. straight drop, screen pass to M. Bell to left side.
18. Short drop, short lob to left sideline, catch made over back of defender (PI declined), pass was high.
19. Play action straight drop, converted to rollout because of pressure, throw intended for Scheffler who was interfered with and knocked off his feet, but flag was picked up with claim that defender was also going for ball. Pass appeared to be offline, but no good camera angle to tell if it was catchable if Scheffler hadn't had his feet cut out from underneath him.
20. Bootleg right, Devoe seperates from defender and is wide open on left side of field coming across middle, Jake throws high, floating 40 yard pass over Devoe and intercepted at 5 yard line.
21. Straight drop, lob pass intended for Smith at right sideline, pass a little long/high, and off Smiths fingers as it was batted away by defender running in stride with Smith.
22. Straight drop, pass to Smith at near left numbers on short curl route, slightly high (reach up, no jump)
23. Straight drop, throwin while back peddling because of pressure, pass intended for Walker, low and in front of Walker, who dove but the ball bounced.
x24x. Straight drop, pass intended for Walker on left sideline, lob pass, knocked away by defender, PI called.
24. Straight drop, screen attempt to T. Bell on right side, pass high and off Tatum's one outstretched hand.
25. short drop, pass to Walker between right numbers and hash mark on right side, pass hit Walker in stride.
26. Bootleg left, pass intended for Smith near left numbers, who was covered by defender. Defender tips ball which is intercepted by another defender.

Second half summary:

11 incompletions, of those:
1 dead on target, but dropped
2 slightly off target, but very catchable
5 poorly thrown, catchable with good to great effort by receiver (one INT)
2 impossible for receiver to catch (one INT)
1 not known (catch where Scheff was interfered with, but flag picked up, it is impossible to tell if ball was catchable from camer angles available).

4 completions, of those:
2 on target
2 slightly off target

First half 13 of the 14 pass attempts were straight drop backs or drop back play actions. They attempted ONE bootleg in the first half and their was a blown coverage assignment where an unblocked DB came free right at Jake and sacked him as Jake was just turning from the play action (after reading the play by play, I remembered that).

Second half 13 of 15 pass attempts were straight drop backs or play action, straight drop backs, two boots in the half.

For the game. 29 pass plays (including sacks) of them three were boots, 25 were combinations of short, deep straight drops and traditional straight drop play action attempts.

The defense didn't dictate the game, the Broncos CHANGED their offensive play calling from what was successful the three previous years.

Tned
05-06-2008, 09:50 PM
Time for bed, but I went through the first three series of week 2, 2006 and here are the Broncos offensive plays:

offtackle - 4 yds
offtackle 5 yds
Toss right 5 yds
Toss left 2 yds
Shotgun - incomplete (hit while throwing)

second series
Broncos recover fumble on their own 13
Double reverse, loss of 5
offtackle 3 yards
Drop back pass (hit while throwing), dump to M. Bell, picks up 12

Third Series
Toss right, run up middle - 2 yds
Run off tackle - 3 yds
Shotgun - 3 yds


======

I know this thread has gotten way off topic from Tyan Torain, and maybe we should move this to another thread, but as can be seen here or in my threads starting week 1 of 2006 on Mania, I am pretty passionate about how the Broncos offensive coaching staff screwed the pooch by putting the Broncos offense in a position to fail with their play calling and continued the trend for two years and are finally trying to fix it by upgrading the size of the line (part of that was done last year bringing in Holland).

Tned
05-06-2008, 09:53 PM
By the way, here is another one I posted on 9-11-2006, which was a further breakdown of the game in response to all the "blueprint" talk that was going on about how the defense 'dictated' the Broncos offensive play.


Thread Title: blueprint used on Sunday, that theory is bunk


Ok, I think everyone needs to ease off the panic button a bit in terms of the 'blueprint' nonsense the press is touting.

Look at the first half. Three turnovers. Of those, Tatum's wasn't a result of pressuring Jake. Jake's fumble was partially a result of pressure, but only in the sense that a rookie back failed to execute a cut block on a rushing end and give Jake a few seconds to throw.

Jake's INT in the first half was on a play where he was back-peddling, but that was on him, he should have thrown it away, or made a better throw. In the NFL, you have to be able to throw while back peddling sometimes.

So, really only ONE turnover in the first half could be accounted to 'rattling' Plummer by applying pressure.

Contrast that with Jake going 9-11 in the first half, almost exclusively throwing from the pocked (regular drop back and screens) and it is clear that the problem in the first half was not blue print or 'rattle Jake' related.

Let's look at the first half drives. Play by play breakdown of the passing plays available here http://forums.denverbroncos.com/showthread.php?p=1265768#post1265768

Drive one: Broncos convert a 3rd and 3, they are approaching mid field, have a 3rd and 7, and Little beats Foster (barely, they both went to the ground, and little reached out and grabbed Plummer's ankle) and get's a sack. PUnt.

Drive two: Broncos have a 3rd and 4, and cnvert with a 8 yard pass to Smith. Next play, M. Bell fails to execute a but block on a rushing end (Little who would turn out to be the player of the game IMO) and Jake is hit without ever seeing the rusher coming and fumbles the ball.

Drive three: First play after Denver takes over from the Rams' missed field goal, Tatum fumbles the ball.

Drive four: After M. Bell runs of 3 and 4 yards, Denver has a 3rd and 3. Some pressure comes and as Jake is back peddling, he throws a ball intended for Smith, that is intercepted. Bad throw, bad decision, or both.

So, at this point, we are 2-4 in third down conversions (50% is pretty good), but we have just turned the ball over on three consecutive series and the momentum is swinging big time in favor of St. Louis.

Drive five: M. Bell for 7 and 2 yards, leaving us with a 3 and 1, and Denver tries it's first bootleg of the game, and an ublocked DB nails Jake for a 10 yard loss. This is one of the plays that is leading people to the 'blue print theory"

Drive six: After 2 runs by M. Bell netted 0 yards and a screen to Bell netted 9, the Broncos have 4th and a foot or so on their own 30 and go for it on 4th down and make it. They then proceed to march down the field with 5 more fist downs and score a TD.

So, if you look at the first half, there was NO Blueprint in evidence. There were three costly turnovers on three consecutive plays, none a result of some blue print, there were a couple well timed sacks by the Rams, including the 10 yard loss on the bootleg, the ONLY play that even came close to a resemblance of a blue print, but you can just as easily say that Mike shouldn't have gotten cute on 3rd and 1 with a blue print, run the ball, or that Jake should have seen the DB was lined up to blitz, and should have audibled.

In addition to the turnovers, M. Bell had a bad half rushing, only going 9-22. some will point to the two goal line runs, but one was wiped out by a penalty and even if you remove the 1 yeard TD run, he is 8 for 21 and a 2.6 average. so, the Rams did bottle up the run in the first half, which was actually a bigger factor than pressuring Jake, outside of the three turnovers.

Bottom line. Turnovers on three consective series will make any team look bad, and any defensive plan look great, but the fact is that opposing defenses can't blueprint those there turnovers, since they were the Broncos fault, not the Rams success. There was no blue print used in that game. The Broncos simply shot themselves in the foot in the first half, and came out in the second half continued making mistakes (Jake INTs and special team problems) and lost.

Where I was wrong was not about the blueprint, since that clearly wasn't the case. However, I underestimated how the Broncos offensive coaching staff would continue their attempt to force through this drop back passing game, not matter how unsuccsesful it was.

So, in hindsight the fans should have been pushing panic button, but not because of other teams having a blue print, but because the Broncos offensive coaching staff would continue their failed experiment for the entire year.

TXBRONC
05-06-2008, 10:00 PM
Ok, I was curious, so I went and checked my mania posts following week 1, 2006. I did a play by play breakdown of the game:



First half 13 of the 14 pass attempts were straight drop backs or drop back play actions. They attempted ONE bootleg in the first half and their was a blown coverage assignment where an unblocked DB came free right at Jake and sacked him as Jake was just turning from the play action (after reading the play by play, I remembered that).

Second half 13 of 15 pass attempts were straight drop backs or play action, straight drop backs, two boots in the half.

For the game. 29 pass plays (including sacks) of them three were boots, 25 were combinations of short, deep straight drops and traditional straight drop play action attempts.

The defense didn't dictate the game, the Broncos CHANGED their offensive play calling from what was successful the three previous years.

Then where you and I were at is a matter of semantics. Yes the types of plays that were being called did change however, Shanahan said he was looking to open up more of his playbook when he hired Dinger. (There is another part to that I think is important but it's not worth warring over again and I don't mean and me.)

Using straight drop backs off of the play action works even with a small line but the key is that running game has to be feared. So while still been successful running the ball our running game wasn't feared so it makes play action with a straight drop back less effective.

slim
05-06-2008, 10:20 PM
http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa127/jefslo_24/untitled-6.jpg

Lonestar
05-07-2008, 12:28 AM
And when they started '06, with a healthy, but 'finesse' o-line and started attempting to run a drop back passing offense, the o-line couldn't handle it, even before the injuries (also seen in the AFCCG, when the Broncos couldn't run the ball and were left with pocket/play action passing).

My contention, one you will like because it casts blame on Shanny as well as Heimerdinger, is that the Assistant head coach - offense, OC and HC should know what their teams strengths and weaknesses are and shouldn't just decide that their line averaging around 290lbs was going to be able to stand up in a drop-back passing scheme, not to mention the fact it wasn't Jake's stength. So, you combine putting a QB in a passing scheme that isn't his strength and having Defensive players teeing off on him before or during every pass, because your O-line can't handle a drop back passing game?

I saw this and was screeming about it after the first game of '06.

There has IMO alot of arrogance floating s around dove valley for awhile.. I'm the mastermind I can pull OLINES out of the 6-7th round, my RB are always gonna get 1000yards any behind my OLINES will be the second coming of TD..

The Steelers deflated that balloon fast everything has changed since the blow up in the playoffs.

All of a sudden our RB and OLINE is nothing super special. Now most of the changes IMO have been for the better, but I do not trust mikey any longer, he needs to rebuild his trust by winning convincingly these next few years then he will become the mastermind again.. BTW I think 2009 will be the breakthough year.. 2008 just has way to many changes in it so far..

It has IMO always boiled down to the LOS. every since that first Manning blowout in 2003 I think it was where we went into IND a couple of weeks after crushing them in one of the final reg season games.. Manning lit our DB's up like Christmas trees.. we went after CB's got Champ and it still did not matter because we still had not pass rush..

Hopefully this year that 5 or 6 year trend is broken.

Tned
05-07-2008, 06:41 AM
Then where you and I were at is a matter of semantics. Yes the types of plays that were being called did change however, Shanahan said he was looking to open up more of his playbook when he hired Dinger. (There is another part to that I think is important but it's not worth warring over again and I don't mean and me.)

Using straight drop backs off of the play action works even with a small line but the key is that running game has to be feared. So while still been successful running the ball our running game wasn't feared so it makes play action with a straight drop back less effective.

I agree with all of what you say with the addition that running the bootleg, helps open up the run game, by not allowing all the defenders to blitz/crash the middle.

On the first three series of the second game I watched, on several of the handoffs, Jake then followed through with a rollout fake and it was clear that if he had held the ball, he would have been wide open, as in years past. The fear of that in years past caused the ends to hesitate to read the play, which was a benefit in both the run and pass game.

Other teams use other methods to open up the run game, assuming they don't have a 'power' running game that can pound through any defense. Many teams use a spread offense, which is something Indy does. They spread out the field, require the defense to spread out to cover all the receivers (including TE's and RB's) and then run against the more porous defense.

The Broncos, with a small, finesse line can't run the power run game, and don't have the line (at least didn't, hopefully this year is different) to run a spread offense, so what they were left with was running a tight (one or two TE's) and one or two RB's, and STILL not able to protect the QB in straight drop back/shotgun passing (the case two years straight before and after injuries effected the line). Therefore, the passing game never opened up the running game, and with our finesse line, the running game isn't powerful enough to open up the passing game.

Tned
05-07-2008, 06:50 AM
There has IMO alot of arrogance floating s around dove valley for awhile.. I'm the mastermind I can pull OLINES out of the 6-7th round, my RB are always gonna get 1000yards any behind my OLINES will be the second coming of TD..

The Steelers deflated that balloon fast everything has changed since the blow up in the playoffs.

All of a sudden our RB and OLINE is nothing super special. Now most of the changes IMO have been for the better, but I do not trust mikey any longer, he needs to rebuild his trust by winning convincingly these next few years then he will become the mastermind again.. BTW I think 2009 will be the breakthough year.. 2008 just has way to many changes in it so far..

It has IMO always boiled down to the LOS. every since that first Manning blowout in 2003 I think it was where we went into IND a couple of weeks after crushing them in one of the final reg season games.. Manning lit our DB's up like Christmas trees.. we went after CB's got Champ and it still did not matter because we still had not pass rush..

Hopefully this year that 5 or 6 year trend is broken.

A couple points here:

First, the Pitt game "shouldn't" have deflated anything. We were playing a Pitt team with an awesome defense, that matched up against us as well as could be. The team struggled on offense and defense.

The part many fans, and more unfortunately the coaches, lost site of was we were 13-3 getting to the AFCCG (not counting playoff wins), and were something like 45-15 (going by memory) over a three year period.

So, the fact that Pitt outplayed Denver on both sides of the ball was unfortunate, but that doesn't mean you scrap what gave you a 45-15 record (third only to Indy and NE) when the only team that has dominated you over the three year period was Indy, and one manhandling by Pitt.

Instead, continue doing what had made you successful, but if the FO saw a need to change (such as drafting Cutler and moving to a drop back pass game), then start drafting/pickup players that fit the the 'future' scheme you wanted to run and then when you had the players 'in place', then switch the offensive scheme.

Second, the big difference between where I sit and you sit is that you see the team (more specifically the Shanahan) as a failure for many years, I see a team that was the third winningest team (or very close to it) over a three year period that ended being one game from the SB, and then having a coaching staff over-react to a loss and immediately drop into mediocrity with no player loss or other reasons (other than scheme changes on offense and defense) to justify the rapid fall off in production.

TXBRONC
05-07-2008, 07:13 AM
I agree with all of what you say with the addition that running the bootleg, helps open up the run game, by not allowing all the defenders to blitz/crash the middle.

On the first three series of the second game I watched, on several of the handoffs, Jake then followed through with a rollout fake and it was clear that if he had held the ball, he would have been wide open, as in years past. The fear of that in years past caused the ends to hesitate to read the play, which was a benefit in both the run and pass game.

Other teams use other methods to open up the run game, assuming they don't have a 'power' running game that can pound through any defense. Many teams use a spread offense, which is something Indy does. They spread out the field, require the defense to spread out to cover all the receivers (including TE's and RB's) and then run against the more porous defense.

The Broncos, with a small, finesse line can't run the power run game, and don't have the line (at least didn't, hopefully this year is different) to run a spread offense, so what they were left with was running a tight (one or two TE's) and one or two RB's, and STILL not able to protect the QB in straight drop back/shotgun passing (the case two years straight before and after injuries effected the line). Therefore, the passing game never opened up the running game, and with our finesse line, the running game isn't powerful enough to open up the passing game.

Hopefully that's about to change. We've gotten bigger on the line offensive line and hopefully better and if Torain pans out we could end up having a solid running game.

Tned
05-07-2008, 07:22 AM
Hopefully that's about to change. We've gotten bigger on the line offensive line and hopefully better and if Torain pans out we could end up having a solid running game.

I hope so as well.

dogfish
05-07-2008, 12:48 PM
holy shit, who pushed T's buttons on this one?


:eek: :lol:

Tned
05-07-2008, 12:49 PM
holy shit, who pushed T's buttons on this one?


:eek: :lol:

It's been a pet peeve of mine dating back to week 1 of 2006, when the offensive geniuses of the Broncos decided being one of the winningest teams in the NFL for the previous three years wasn't 'good enough'.

Ziggy
05-07-2008, 01:52 PM
It's been a pet peeve of mine dating back to week 1 of 2006, when the offensive geniuses of the Broncos decided being one of the winningest teams in the NFL for the previous three years wasn't 'good enough'.

If you're not winning Super Bowls in Denver, then it's not good enough. Period. Bowlen and Shanahan don't set out to make the playoffs and be content. THey want championships. Thank goodness.

As far as changing the offense, you posted Plummer's stats for the beginning of the 2006 season. Let's look at his stats for the 2005 playoffs.

vs New England- 15/26 197 yards 1TD 1INT
vs Pitt- 18/30 211 yards 1TD 2INT 2 FUMBLES

That was with the smoke and mirror offense. It was good enough to get to the playoffs. Not good enough to win in them. I know you hate to hear about playoff wins, but 1 victory in 9 years? It speaks for itself. Ask Bowlen if he's happy with that. He's not. It's great that we're competitive, but it's not enough for Bowlen and Shanahan. They knew they had to change it. It starts with personel. Shanny failed for many years there. Things are looking up.

Tned, can you tell me the last time a team with a smoke and mirrors offense won the Super Bowl? It doesn't happen, unless you have one of the greatest defenses in NFL history. We don't.

Ziggy
05-07-2008, 02:03 PM
Tned, I'm not bashing you or disagreeing with everything you have to say. I think that you may not be seeing the forest through the trees. You are applauding the fact that the Broncos were competitive, and complaining about the fact that they started changing. It's that exact thing, change, that keeps them competitive.

With the serious lack of overall talent on this team, Shanny has had to change the personel, bring in high priced free agents, trade a star running back to get the top tier corner that he could never draft, change defensive schemes and coordinators, and now change offensive philosiphies. I see this change as good. Misdirection only works for so long, and then sooner or later you have to line up and beat the other team at the same game. The scheme was exposed in the playoffs. Even the years befrore the AFCCG. The stats looked good on offense, but they couldn't stay on the field, score and keep the defense off. It was time for a change.

Lonestar
05-07-2008, 03:36 PM
Tned, I'm not bashing you or disagreeing with everything you have to say. I think that you may not be seeing the forest through the trees. You are applauding the fact that the Broncos were competitive, and complaining about the fact that they started changing. It's that exact thing, change, that keeps them competitive.

With the serious lack of overall talent on this team, Shanny has had to change the personel, bring in high priced free agents, trade a star running back to get the top tier corner that he could never draft, change defensive schemes and coordinators, and now change offensive philosiphies. I see this change as good. Misdirection only works for so long, and then sooner or later you have to line up and beat the other team at the same game. The scheme was exposed in the playoffs. Even the years befrore the AFCCG. The stats looked good on offense, but they couldn't stay on the field, score and keep the defense off. It was time for a change.

I'll second that!! I also think it is time for a bigger change..

Great post BTW

Tned was getting to your conclusion just had not made the last leap of faith that you and few more have..

Tned
05-07-2008, 04:34 PM
If you're not winning Super Bowls in Denver, then it's not good enough. Period. Bowlen and Shanahan don't set out to make the playoffs and be content. THey want championships. Thank goodness.

As far as changing the offense, you posted Plummer's stats for the beginning of the 2006 season. Let's look at his stats for the 2005 playoffs.

vs New England- 15/26 197 yards 1TD 1INT
vs Pitt- 18/30 211 yards 1TD 2INT 2 FUMBLES

That was with the smoke and mirror offense. It was good enough to get to the playoffs. Not good enough to win in them. I know you hate to hear about playoff wins, but 1 victory in 9 years? It speaks for itself. Ask Bowlen if he's happy with that. He's not. It's great that we're competitive, but it's not enough for Bowlen and Shanahan. They knew they had to change it. It starts with personel. Shanny failed for many years there. Things are looking up.

Tned, can you tell me the last time a team with a smoke and mirrors offense won the Super Bowl? It doesn't happen, unless you have one of the greatest defenses in NFL history. We don't.

Clearly, it was good enough to win against NE (regularly in the regular season and playoffs) and I addressed the Pitt issue in another thread.

As to only winning SB's, while I have said the same thing, and I think it is great that prior to the last couple years, Denver had been a playoff contender most of the previous 12 years or so, let's look at this "It's the SB or bust" concept.

Bowlen has owned the team since '83 or '84, right? So, in 24 years, he has won two SB's and it took about 14 years to win the first one. So, based on that, we are at least 4 years away from winning another.

When you look at how often teams actually win the SB, winning every 12 years is a fairly major accomplishment, since if every team was to win ONE time, it would take 32 years to make one cycle.

So, it is great to say that "in Denver, all that matters is winning the SB", but that simply means that the Denver Broncos have been a complete failure for 22 of the 24 years Bowlen has owned the team, yet the value of his franchise has quadrupled or more?

The reality is that in the NFL getting to the playoffs is the yardstick, and as I showed in the previous thread, only a few teams make it to the playoffs three years in a row and even fewer see an AFCCG or NFCCG within any given three year period.

So, you can say Indy and NE got their wins the 'real' way, and Denver (third best) got their wins with smoke and mirrors, but that's a little hard to substantiate when it occurs over a three year period, and the third year of that run is a 13-3 year with an AFCCG appearance.

I'm not saying replacing Plummer was a bad thing, I jumped for joy when Cutler was drafted. My contention is the Broncos should have continued to run the same offense in 2006 that led to all of those wins over the previous 3 years, whether Jake or Jay was at QB, up until the rest of the offensive talent (especially the line) was capable of running a new scheme.


Tned, I'm not bashing you or disagreeing with everything you have to say. I think that you may not be seeing the forest through the trees. You are applauding the fact that the Broncos were competitive, and complaining about the fact that they started changing. It's that exact thing, change, that keeps them competitive.

No, I am not complaining they started to change, I am stating that they didn't implement a good change strategy. The last two years have shown that the talent on the field couldn't execute the new strategies.

Wanting change and being in a position to make a change are different things. There are a great many teams that would love to create pressure with the front four like the Bears did a few years back, that doesn't mean they could run a non-blitzing offense and get a ton of sacks, just because they "wanted" to change and have a defense like the Bears.

Just because a team wants a high flying offense like Indy or St. Louis' greatest show on turf, doesn't mean a team can just say, "we are going to change, and have Indy's offense".

Starting to draft and aquire players capable of running a new scheme is great, but you can't change the scheme before you have the players capable of executing it on the field and still hope to be successful.


With the serious lack of overall talent on this team, Shanny has had to change the personel, bring in high priced free agents, trade a star running back to get the top tier corner that he could never draft, change defensive schemes and coordinators, and now change offensive philosiphies. I see this change as good. Misdirection only works for so long, and then sooner or later you have to line up and beat the other team at the same game. The scheme was exposed in the playoffs. Even the years befrore the AFCCG. The stats looked good on offense, but they couldn't stay on the field, score and keep the defense off. It was time for a change.

The part that some people don't seem to get "forest trees in reverse", is that nothing has been gained by running an offensive and defensive scheme that the players aren't capable of running. Having two losing seasons (other than better draft picks), will have in no way helped the Broncos prepare for future winning seasons. They could have just as easily run the schemes (offensive and defensive) that led to the third best win total between '03 and '05, and continuing to win games, then when the talent on the field had changed to the point of being capable of running the new schemes, THEN switch the offensive/defensive scheme.

If you need any other proof of that fact, why are Bates and Heimerdinger now gone if their schemes were so successful? If the last two years of losing were some how constructive in building for a future SB win?

They were let go, because they didn't utilize the talent on the field to win games. Plain and simple.

underrated29
05-07-2008, 04:57 PM
WEll with all that said tned you have me very optomistic about the upcomming season.

reasons are:
we abandoned hermi and bates schemes and look to be going back to what was working for us when we went 13-3. Shanny is going to be calling the offensive shots- which is what he is best at.

and I love the talent on this team on the offensive side of the ball. I think its as good or maybe better than the 13-3 team.

i like the qb better, the te's better, the wr is a wash, and rb is only thing not better. It would be if travis could stay healthy but for now i have to assume thats a no.

If what you say is true we should have a good record if the d can get off the field.

G_Money
05-07-2008, 05:11 PM
I agree with pretty much everything you said, Tned, with a couple of caveats.

The Broncos offense of the Plummer era was entirely limited in scope. It was very effective at what it did, but it didn't do much. Wasn't it Parcells that said "Those Broncos only run like 5 plays, but they run them from a dozen formations which makes it hard to stop them."

Well, that might be partially true, and there's something to be said for lining up when the other guy knows what you're gonna run and executing it for positive yardage anyway, but Plummer couldn't MAKE most of the throws required to truly make the offense elite.

As our line has gotten worse we haven't been able to make the hard, short-yardage runs either.

And Shanny/Dinger has had no solution the last couple of years, even without Jake.

The Broncos offense requires that we force other teams to commit to stopping the run, and then pass over the top. Jake couldn't do the latter consistently, so anybody who could shut down our run game could shut us down entirely. Cutler should be able to do it better with his skill-set, but we have yet to see him truly excel at it. Maybe now that his Diabetes should be under control he'll be able to do that.

But there are times we still need to be able to run it on 3rd and short or 2nd and goal and Make It Happen, and that's on the line. We were having that trouble with Bell and Anderson at times, but once Mike left it got much worse, so part of it has to be a running back issue, even though the lack of holes the last couple years in critical situations also makes it a line issue.

Mike has been addressing the line for a couple of years now, but I'd still like to see him address the back part of it. Maybe that's Torain. Maybe it's our new fullback. Whoever it is, 3rd down conversions make for long drives, and hitting every possible passing route makes it hard to over-commit to the run-stopping.

We'll see if the Broncos have gotten the stale play-calling out of the way. We'll see if they've fixed their OL issues, and if their RBBC can be more effective than it has been the last couple of years, and if their wides can cut it.

Now that Dinger is gone, I'm more than eager to see how Shanny runs his offense. Kubes ran it to near-perfection no matter what personnel were given him. This is a case where I hope the master hasn't gotten too rusty with the student at the wheel lo these many years.

If he has...we could be in trouble.

But at least now that Dinger isn't there we'll be able to tell once and for all.

~G

turftoad
05-07-2008, 06:40 PM
I agree with pretty much everything you said, Tned, with a couple of caveats.

The Broncos offense of the Plummer era was entirely limited in scope. It was very effective at what it did, but it didn't do much. Wasn't it Parcells that said "Those Broncos only run like 5 plays, but they run them from a dozen formations which makes it hard to stop them."

Well, that might be partially true, and there's something to be said for lining up when the other guy knows what you're gonna run and executing it for positive yardage anyway, but Plummer couldn't MAKE most of the throws required to truly make the offense elite.

As our line has gotten worse we haven't been able to make the hard, short-yardage runs either.

And Shanny/Dinger has had no solution the last couple of years, even without Jake.

The Broncos offense requires that we force other teams to commit to stopping the run, and then pass over the top. Jake couldn't do the latter consistently, so anybody who could shut down our run game could shut us down entirely. Cutler should be able to do it better with his skill-set, but we have yet to see him truly excel at it. Maybe now that his Diabetes should be under control he'll be able to do that.

But there are times we still need to be able to run it on 3rd and short or 2nd and goal and Make It Happen, and that's on the line. We were having that trouble with Bell and Anderson at times, but once Mike left it got much worse, so part of it has to be a running back issue, even though the lack of holes the last couple years in critical situations also makes it a line issue.

Mike has been addressing the line for a couple of years now, but I'd still like to see him address the back part of it. Maybe that's Torain. Maybe it's our new fullback. Whoever it is, 3rd down conversions make for long drives, and hitting every possible passing route makes it hard to over-commit to the run-stopping.

We'll see if the Broncos have gotten the stale play-calling out of the way. We'll see if they've fixed their OL issues, and if their RBBC can be more effective than it has been the last couple of years, and if their wides can cut it.

Now that Dinger is gone, I'm more than eager to see how Shanny runs his offense. Kubes ran it to near-perfection no matter what personnel were given him. This is a case where I hope the master hasn't gotten too rusty with the student at the wheel lo these many years.

If he has...we could be in trouble.

But at least now that Dinger isn't there we'll be able to tell once and for all.

~G

Great post G.

TXBRONC
05-07-2008, 06:51 PM
I agree with pretty much everything you said, Tned, with a couple of caveats.

The Broncos offense of the Plummer era was entirely limited in scope. It was very effective at what it did, but it didn't do much. Wasn't it Parcells that said "Those Broncos only run like 5 plays, but they run them from a dozen formations which makes it hard to stop them."

Well, that might be partially true, and there's something to be said for lining up when the other guy knows what you're gonna run and executing it for positive yardage anyway, but Plummer couldn't MAKE most of the throws required to truly make the offense elite.

As our line has gotten worse we haven't been able to make the hard, short-yardage runs either.

And Shanny/Dinger has had no solution the last couple of years, even without Jake.

The Broncos offense requires that we force other teams to commit to stopping the run, and then pass over the top. Jake couldn't do the latter consistently, so anybody who could shut down our run game could shut us down entirely. Cutler should be able to do it better with his skill-set, but we have yet to see him truly excel at it. Maybe now that his Diabetes should be under control he'll be able to do that.

But there are times we still need to be able to run it on 3rd and short or 2nd and goal and Make It Happen, and that's on the line. We were having that trouble with Bell and Anderson at times, but once Mike left it got much worse, so part of it has to be a running back issue, even though the lack of holes the last couple years in critical situations also makes it a line issue.

Mike has been addressing the line for a couple of years now, but I'd still like to see him address the back part of it. Maybe that's Torain. Maybe it's our new fullback. Whoever it is, 3rd down conversions make for long drives, and hitting every possible passing route makes it hard to over-commit to the run-stopping.

We'll see if the Broncos have gotten the stale play-calling out of the way. We'll see if they've fixed their OL issues, and if their RBBC can be more effective than it has been the last couple of years, and if their wides can cut it.

Now that Dinger is gone, I'm more than eager to see how Shanny runs his offense. Kubes ran it to near-perfection no matter what personnel were given him. This is a case where I hope the master hasn't gotten too rusty with the student at the wheel lo these many years.

If he has...we could be in trouble.

But at least now that Dinger isn't there we'll be able to tell once and for all.

~G



I think you're spot on G. The part that I highlighted is one the reason's Dinger was hired and Jay was drafted, at least that is what I think.

Tned
05-07-2008, 07:51 PM
I agree with pretty much everything you said, Tned, with a couple of caveats.

The Broncos offense of the Plummer era was entirely limited in scope. It was very effective at what it did, but it didn't do much. Wasn't it Parcells that said "Those Broncos only run like 5 plays, but they run them from a dozen formations which makes it hard to stop them."

Well, that might be partially true, and there's something to be said for lining up when the other guy knows what you're gonna run and executing it for positive yardage anyway, but Plummer couldn't MAKE most of the throws required to truly make the offense elite.

As our line has gotten worse we haven't been able to make the hard, short-yardage runs either.

And Shanny/Dinger has had no solution the last couple of years, even without Jake.

The Broncos offense requires that we force other teams to commit to stopping the run, and then pass over the top. Jake couldn't do the latter consistently, so anybody who could shut down our run game could shut us down entirely. Cutler should be able to do it better with his skill-set, but we have yet to see him truly excel at it. Maybe now that his Diabetes should be under control he'll be able to do that.

But there are times we still need to be able to run it on 3rd and short or 2nd and goal and Make It Happen, and that's on the line. We were having that trouble with Bell and Anderson at times, but once Mike left it got much worse, so part of it has to be a running back issue, even though the lack of holes the last couple years in critical situations also makes it a line issue.

Mike has been addressing the line for a couple of years now, but I'd still like to see him address the back part of it. Maybe that's Torain. Maybe it's our new fullback. Whoever it is, 3rd down conversions make for long drives, and hitting every possible passing route makes it hard to over-commit to the run-stopping.

We'll see if the Broncos have gotten the stale play-calling out of the way. We'll see if they've fixed their OL issues, and if their RBBC can be more effective than it has been the last couple of years, and if their wides can cut it.

Now that Dinger is gone, I'm more than eager to see how Shanny runs his offense. Kubes ran it to near-perfection no matter what personnel were given him. This is a case where I hope the master hasn't gotten too rusty with the student at the wheel lo these many years.

If he has...we could be in trouble.

But at least now that Dinger isn't there we'll be able to tell once and for all.

~G

I agree with all that you said, including Jake's limitations. The point I have been trying to make you summed up in this: "Kubes ran it to near-perfection no matter what personnel were given him."

The last two years we have not run plays that suited the personell on the field. Heimerdinger in '06 and then he and Bates in '07, attempted to run schemes and call plays that didn't suit the personell on the field/team.

I'm all for the upgrades on the O-line -- I was thrilled when Jay was drafted, although I fully admit that I hoped to see Denver run the same offense in '06 that had been successful in previous years and have Cutler come in no sooner than '07 after a winning '06 season, rather than the complete departure from what had worked in previous years.

What drives me crazy is when people say Heimerdinger didn't change the offense, didn't call plays, change the offense to one that didn't suit the personell (including when Jay took over, because the line couldn't handle the pocket passing game).

It drives me crazy when people say that the change in '06 offense was because Pitt showed every other team in the league (regardless of whether they had the same dominating D and long haired safety) a 'blueprint' to stop Denver, when anyone that watched the first game of '06 should have been able to IMMEDIATELY see the difference in play calling.

I have used that same quote of Parcells when I talked about the misdirection and formation changes used to keep defenses off balance in previous years.

I would love to get back to the days when they could run TD right at the D when they stacked 8 or even 9 in the box, and we still gained yards and then hit them with the big Elway bomb. I just think it was crazy for the offensive coaches to attempt to call plays like they had TD and Elway lined up behind the '97/98 line, rather than facing the fact they had Jake and Tatum lined up behind the '06 line, and then continued not considering the personell in the play calling all the way through '07.

The good news is that I think the changes on the line (bigger guys Holland, Kuper, Clady) will hopefully lead to a more dominant line and run game, and agree we need a more solid RB, and hopefully Torain, or possibly Hillis will fill that role. With his health back (and hopefully his number 1 receiver back), along with better protection, I think Cutler will be a force to deal with. Hopefully, in '08, but if not, it's just a matter of time.

Tned
05-07-2008, 07:54 PM
I think you're spot on G. The part that I highlighted is one the reason's Dinger was hired and Jay was drafted, at least that is what I think.

You are completely right as to why Jay was drafted, BUT attempting to call plays that Jay could make, but Jake couldn't, while Jake was still behind center, and the line couldn't handle the pass blocking or run blocking, REGARDLESS of who was behind center, was a complete failure, which is a summation of Heimerdinger's time in Denver -- Complete Failure.

Drafting Jay, getting graham, drafting Clady are all good moves, but you don't start calling the plays until the personell is in place that is capable of executing those plays.

TXBRONC
05-07-2008, 08:20 PM
You are completely right as to why Jay was drafted, BUT attempting to call plays that Jay could make, but Jake couldn't, while Jake was still behind center, and the line couldn't handle the pass blocking or run blocking, REGARDLESS of who was behind center, was a complete failure, which is a summation of Heimerdinger's time in Denver -- Complete Failure.

Drafting Jay, getting graham, drafting Clady are all good moves, but you don't start calling the plays until the personell is in place that is capable of executing those plays.


I would venture to say that maybe Shanahan did think he had right personell in place. In hindsight he seems to have been mistaken.

It also didn't help to have 3/5 of the offensive line to end up on the I.R. over the past two seasons.

Tned
05-07-2008, 08:25 PM
I would venture to say that maybe Shanahan did think he had right personell in place. In hindsight he seems to have been mistaken.

It also didn't help to have 3/5 of the offensive line to end up on the I.R. over the past two seasons.

But it was a failure from week 1 of '06 when 3/5 wasn't on IR. Clearly Shanahan does see it as a mistake in hindsight both based on the current draft, but more importantly the removal of Bates and his friend, Heimerdinger.

elsid13
05-07-2008, 08:44 PM
Dinger should get a lot of the blame when comes to the passing game (that was his area of responsibility) but the OC Rick Dennison deserves some to for the line and rushing attacking, especial within the red zone.

TXBRONC
05-07-2008, 08:57 PM
But it was a failure from week 1 of '06 when 3/5 wasn't on IR. Clearly Shanahan does see it as a mistake in hindsight both based on the current draft, but more importantly the removal of Bates and his friend, Heimerdinger.

I'm not disagreeing with you that it failed because it did.

However, if you're thinking that we're going back to the same offensive stradegy from '05 I don't see that happening. In the three and half years that Jake was the quarterback we didn't do much in way of spreading the field and running mutiple receiver set which is something Shanahan has always like doing.

Tned
05-07-2008, 09:42 PM
I'm not disagreeing with you that it failed because it did.

However, if you're thinking that we're going back to the same offensive stradegy from '05 I don't see that happening. In the three and half years that Jake was the quarterback we didn't do much in way of spreading the field and running mutiple receiver set which is something Shanahan has always like doing.

No, I am "hoping" that Shanahan gets more involved in the offense and once again an offensive scheme and play calling that 'matches' the talent on the field are utilized.

The talent on the field has changed since '05, and even since '06 and '07. We are actually, assuming Marshall comes back and Clady can step in, much closer to running the Heimerdinger offense now than in '06, but that is a bit off point.

If you look at what Shanahan and Kubiak did, they constantly tailored the offensive schemes, formations and play calling to suit the talent on the field. When kubiak left, Heimerdinger, and possibly Dennison as it isn't clear who really was calling the shots but my money is on the guy that is no longer in town, attempted to use a cookie cutter approach to the offense. Heimerdinger attempted to install a drop back/pocket passing game from week 1 of 2006, which was not suited to the QB nor the offensive line.

Now, with a healthy O-line, that hopefully includes better tackles in Clady and Kuper/Pears/Harris, along with being beefier with Holland, lined up with Hamilton and Nalen, the talent 'might' support more drop back/pocket passing and more of a power running game. I don't really know, but I am not paid millions of dollars to know the answer.

What I do know is that for the last two years, Heimerdinger didn't design an offense that suited the players on the field and there is no excuse for that.

What I expect (hope, would be a better word) this year, is that Shanahan and Dennison don't cookie cutter it (whether it be with Heimerdingers ideas or the offense run from '03-'05), but instead evaluate the talent on the team, and utilize an offensive scheme and play calling that suits that talent.

The talent on the team did not lead to the two disatorous seasons, even the injuries take a back seat, it was the offensive and defensive coaching blunders (see TWO ASSISTANT HEAD COACHES no longer on the team) that lead to the two consecutive horrible seasons.

Hopefully, Shanahan works with Dennison the way he worked with Kubiak to bring the most out of the talent on the field, rather than bringing the 'least' by putting them ONLY in a position to fail, as occurred the last two seasons.

TXBRONC
05-07-2008, 09:51 PM
No, I am "hoping" that Shanahan gets more involved in the offense and once again an offensive scheme and play calling that 'matches' the talent on the field are utilized.

The talent on the field has changed since '05, and even since '06 and '07. We are actually, assuming Marshall comes back and Clady can step in, much closer to running the Heimerdinger offense now than in '06, but that is a bit off point.

If you look at what Shanahan and Kubiak did, they constantly tailored the offensive schemes, formations and play calling to suit the talent on the field. When kubiak left, Heimerdinger, and possibly Dennison as it isn't clear who really was calling the shots but my money is on the guy that is no longer in town, attempted to use a cookie cutter approach to the offense. Heimerdinger attempted to install a drop back/pocket passing game from week 1 of 2006, which was not suited to the QB nor the offensive line.

Now, with a healthy O-line, that hopefully includes better tackles in Clady and Kuper/Pears/Harris, along with being beefier with Holland, lined up with Hamilton and Nalen, the talent 'might' support more drop back/pocket passing and more of a power running game. I don't really know, but I am not paid millions of dollars to know the answer.

What I do know is that for the last two years, Heimerdinger didn't design an offense that suited the players on the field and there is no excuse for that.

What I expect (hope, would be a better word) this year, is that Shanahan and Dennison don't cookie cutter it (whether it be with Heimerdingers ideas or the offense run from '03-'05), but instead evaluate the talent on the team, and utilize an offensive scheme and play calling that suits that talent.

The talent on the team did not lead to the two disatorous seasons, even the injuries take a back seat, it was the offensive and defensive coaching blunders (see TWO ASSISTANT HEAD COACHES no longer on the team) that lead to the two consecutive horrible seasons.

Hopefully, Shanahan works with Dennison the way he worked with Kubiak to bring the most out of the talent on the field, rather than bringing the 'least' by putting them ONLY in a position to fail, as occurred the last two seasons.

Fair enough. I do expect that Shanahan will be working more closely with Dennision than he has the previous two seasons.

Tned
05-07-2008, 09:59 PM
Fair enough. I do expect that Shanahan will be working more closely with Dennision than he has the previous two seasons.

I sure hope so. Some where in my ramblings over the last week, I was saying that my real hope is that Shanny becomes much more active with the offense this year and mentors Dennison the way he did Kubiak.

Shanny used to call the plays, but by the end, Kubiak was doing it all. You watch Kubiak in Houston and it is clear that he learned the job and is doing a pretty darn good job with the talent he had to work with. Shanny needs to hold the reins until Dennison or someone else is capable of doing the same.

One time Sharpe made a comment about giving a QB the keys to the Fararri. I don't remember if it was in relation to Griese or Jake. Well, Shanny make the mistake of giving the keys to the Ferrari (ok, maybe a Vette by '06) to Heimerdinger, and dinger couldn't keep it on the road trashed the ride over the two years. Shanny has to take the keys back until someone earns the right to have those keys.

TXBRONC
05-07-2008, 10:12 PM
I sure hope so. Some where in my ramblings over the last week, I was saying that my real hope is that Shanny becomes much more active with the offense this year and mentors Dennison the way he did Kubiak.

Shanny used to call the plays, but by the end, Kubiak was doing it all. You watch Kubiak in Houston and it is clear that he learned the job and is doing a pretty darn good job with the talent he had to work with. Shanny needs to hold the reins until Dennison or someone else is capable of doing the same.

One time Sharpe made a comment about giving a QB the keys to the Fararri. I don't remember if it was in relation to Griese or Jake. Well, Shanny make the mistake of giving the keys to the Ferrari (ok, maybe a Vette by '06) to Heimerdinger, and dinger couldn't keep it on the road trashed the ride over the two years. Shanny has to take the keys back until someone earns the right to have those keys.


Not that it's all that important but Sharpe made that comment to Jake. :nod:

Tned
05-07-2008, 10:57 PM
Not that it's all that important but Sharpe made that comment to Jake. :nod:

I thought it was, but couldn't remember before. Too bad Jay wasn't handed a ferrari rather than a junker that Heimerdinger created.

shank
06-11-2008, 01:31 PM
The Broncos took Torain in the fifth round, which for a running back is like getting selected in the second or third round somewhere else. In fact, had Rashard Mendenhall not fallen to Pittsburgh with the No. 23 pick in the first round, the Steelers had plans of taking Torain at No. 88 overall in the third round.

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_9545197

Requiem / The Dagda
06-11-2008, 01:33 PM
Very interesting, thanks Shaw!

WARHORSE
06-11-2008, 02:07 PM
http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_9545197


I knew that.;)

Ziggy
06-11-2008, 02:10 PM
Quote:
The Broncos took Torain in the fifth round, which for a running back is like getting selected in the second or third round somewhere else. In fact, had Rashard Mendenhall not fallen to Pittsburgh with the No. 23 pick in the first round, the Steelers had plans of taking Torain at No. 88 overall in the third round.


We'll see what happens this season. I still stand by my reasoning that if Shanahan drafted this kid as a late round RB, he's golden in Denver until proven otherwise. With every other position I take a different stance, but Shanny has earned the benefit of the doubt with mid to late round RB's.

lex
06-11-2008, 02:13 PM
I sure hope so. Some where in my ramblings over the last week, I was saying that my real hope is that Shanny becomes much more active with the offense this year and mentors Dennison the way he did Kubiak.

Shanny used to call the plays, but by the end, Kubiak was doing it all. You watch Kubiak in Houston and it is clear that he learned the job and is doing a pretty darn good job with the talent he had to work with. Shanny needs to hold the reins until Dennison or someone else is capable of doing the same.

One time Sharpe made a comment about giving a QB the keys to the Fararri. I don't remember if it was in relation to Griese or Jake. Well, Shanny make the mistake of giving the keys to the Ferrari (ok, maybe a Vette by '06) to Heimerdinger, and dinger couldn't keep it on the road trashed the ride over the two years. Shanny has to take the keys back until someone earns the right to have those keys.


Not that it's all that important but Sharpe made that comment to Jake. :nod:


I thought it was, but couldn't remember before. Too bad Jay wasn't handed a ferrari rather than a junker that Heimerdinger created.

Sharpe may have said it more than once, but I definitely remember him saying this about Bubby Brister taking over as QB while Elway was injured during the vaunted 1998 season. He said it on America's Game.

tubby
06-11-2008, 02:19 PM
I think Torain will lead the team in rushing this year.

Think 2000 Mike Anderson v 2.0

shank
06-11-2008, 03:42 PM
glad to see that lex skipped right over that tidbit

Requiem / The Dagda
06-11-2008, 03:59 PM
Big Gain Ryan Torain Ftw.

WARHORSE
06-11-2008, 05:53 PM
Big Gain Ryan Torain Ftw.

The TRAIN Torain.

turftoad
06-11-2008, 06:19 PM
The TRAIN Torain.

The Torain TRAIN.

shank
06-11-2008, 07:09 PM
torain the main insane warplane of pain, disdain, and bloodstain. oh and for morabar, arcane.

Simple Jaded
06-11-2008, 07:30 PM
"The Broncos took Torain in the fifth round, which for a running back is like getting selected in the second or third round somewhere else."

That doesn't make sense, I don't get it.

Does that mean the Stealers are stupid or the Broncos are smart?

Or does it mean that the "Experts" start humping a RB's leg the second he becomes a Bronco?<------I think it's this one......

TXBRONC
06-11-2008, 08:18 PM
"The Broncos took Torain in the fifth round, which for a running back is like getting selected in the second or third round somewhere else."

That doesn't make sense, I don't get it.

Does that mean the Stealers are stupid or the Broncos are smart?

Or does it mean that the "Experts" start humping a RB's leg the second he becomes a Bronco?<------I think it's this one......

It just simply means that Denver can take a middle round pick at running back and make him star in this offense. What people tend to forget is that Bobby Turner is one of the best position coaches in the NFL.

nevcraw
06-11-2008, 08:27 PM
It just simply means that Denver can take a middle round pick at running back and make him star in this offense. What people tend to forget is that Bobby Taylor is one of the best position coaches in the NFL.

Turner?

TXBRONC
06-11-2008, 08:38 PM
Turner?

Thank you , I fixed it. :salute:

shank
06-11-2008, 09:42 PM
it also means that torain was not a reach in the 5th as teams (with very respectable running games) probably had him ranked higher than where we picked him up.

Simple Jaded
06-11-2008, 10:55 PM
It just simply means that Denver can take a middle round pick at running back and make him star in this offense. What people tend to forget is that Bobby Turner is one of the best position coaches in the NFL.

I agree......but being a star in this offense doesn't mean he's really a star quality RB. See: Anderson, Droughns, Gary, Bell.

I, for one, haven't forgotten anything, I know exactly why Bronco RB's are annually overrated. Turner plays a huge role in that.

Btw, the fact that Pittsburgh wanted Torain as a PlanB (Parcells wanted Clarett too, didn't he?) proves one thing I've been saying all along: The best run organizations would still rather have a Mendenhall.

The Broncos, on the other hand, would rather scavenge through the bargain bin and then just tell you he's a Mendenhall.

Now if Torain does well here (And he probably will), think of what a Mendenhall could do. Just because you can get by with scrubs like Torain, it doesn't mean you have to......

Tned
06-11-2008, 10:59 PM
Now if Torain does well here (And he probably will), think of what a Mendenhall could do. Just because you can get by with scrubs like Torain, it doesn't mean you have to......

Prior to his foot injury, several college scouting reports had him around the top 5 in terms of running backs as he entered his senior year.

tomjonesrocks
06-11-2008, 10:59 PM
It's been beaten to death but is still worth repeating--if Henry was on the chopping block Denver needed to take a running back sooner. Sure, Shanny could have found gold late again--it's not out of the realm of possibility--but chances are Torian will be a "Mike Bell" talent, a warm body until someone who can really handle the load will come along.

There were highly touted, dynamic playmakers at RB all through the draft this year--Shanny just opted not to take one of them. Here's hoping Torian can prove all the scouts/critics wrong--but he feels like a lotto ticket to me--a longshot.

Tned
06-11-2008, 11:05 PM
Ryan Torain: Dark-horse Heisman candidate

I watched several Sun Devil games last year, and although there weren't many bright spots in hardly any of them at all except for the almost-defeat of Southern Cal in the Coliseum, one consistent star that stood out for me was Arizona State running back Ryan Torain.

He was enormously overlooked last year due to the Sun Devils' lackluster performance, but this year this kid may slip in under the Heisman radar by the UCLA game if the team can get their act together by the 2nd or 3rd game.

To put this into perspective, let's compare his stats to some other top returning NCAA runners.

According to NFL Draft Scout's website:

Ryan Torain (Arizona State)
Senior
6'1, 215. (density = 2.95 lbs/inch)
40-time: 4.52 sec
(2006) 223 carries, 1229 yards (5.5 Avg). 7 TDs.

*****

James Davis (Clemson)
Junior
5'11, 208. (density = 2.93 lbs/inch)
40-time: 4.48 sec
2006: 203 carries, 1187 yards (5.8 Avg). 17 TDs

CJ Spiller (Clemson)
Sophomore
5'11, 190. (density = 2.68 lbs/inch)
40-time: 4.43 sec
2006: 129 carries, 938 yards (7.3 Avg). 10 TDs

Steve Slaton (West Virginia)
Junior
5'10, 195. (density = 2.79 lbs/inch)
40-time: 4.42 sec
2006: 248 carries, 1744 yards (7.03 Avg). 16 TDs

Ian Johnson (Boise State)
Junior
5'11, 195. (density = 2.75 lbs/inch)
40-time: 4.48 sec
2006: 276 carries, 1714 yards (6.21 Avg). 25 TDs

Mike Hart (Michigan)
Senior
5'9, 195. (density = 2.83 lbs/inch)
40-time: 4.46 sec
2006: 318 carries, 1562 yards (4.91 Avg). 14 TDs

Darren McFadden (Arkansas)
Junior
6'2, 210. (density = 2.84 lbs/inch)
40-time: 4.43 sec
2006: 284 carries, 1647 yards (5.80 Avg). 14 TDs

Branden Ore (Virginia Tech)
Junior
5'11, 204. (density = 2.87 lbs/inch)
40-time: 4.47 sec
2006: 41 carries, 1137 yards (4.72 Avg). 16 TDs

Tashard Choice (Georgia Tech)
Senior
6'1, 205. (density = 2.81 lbs/inch)
40-time: 4.52 sec
2006: 297 carries, 1473 yards (4.96 Avg). 12 TDs

PJ Hill (Wisconsin)
Sophomore
5'11, 242. (density = 3.41 lbs/inch)
40-time: 4.68 sec
2006: 311 carries, 1569 yards (5.05 Avg). 15 TDs

Cory Boyd (South Carolina)
Senior
6'1, 215. (density = 2.95 lbs/inch)
40-time: 4.54 sec
2006: 164 carries, 823 yards (5.02 Avg). 8 TDs

Ray Rice (Rutgers)
Junior
5'9, 195. (density = 2.83 lbs/inch)
40-time: 4.47 sec
2006: 335 carries, 1794 yards (5.36 Avg). 20 TDs


His ranking among those listed above:

Height: 3-way tie for 2nd with Cory Boyd and Tashard Choice
Weight: Tied for 2nd with Cory Boyd
Density: Tied for 2nd with Cory Boyd)
40-time: Tied for 9th with Tashard Choice
#carries: 8th
Total yards: 8th
Yds/carry: 6th
TDs: 12th (last)

He's in good company, and it's obvious where his strength lies - size. His body-mass density makes him a rock, and at that height he will force tacklers to text-book tackle him (meaning no shoulder-hitting without the arms wrapping-up, and certainly no arm-tackling without a stout body hit). He'll just bounce or shrug it off.

But couple that body-mass density with a 4.5-forty to boot and he will be very difficult to bring down unless your defensive lineman are lucky enough to get past the Devils' now-experienced O-line to even touch him. Or if your linebackers are quick and at least 240 lbs. And if you're a defensive back and he's made it past the linebackers, you're in trouble.

Bull-backs are extremely rare these days. Programs want speedsters or blocking backs, and that's it. Much like the NFL. Not bruisers who not only can drag a couple of defenders around upon impact, but who can also handle the ball well during the take-down and have pretty decent speed. North Carolina recently landed one of these rare bull-backs when Ryan Houston committed a few months ago (6'2, 245 lbs, 4.58 sec forty, 330 bench, 510 squat, 33" vertical leap, also played DE in high school). The Heels have a diamond in Houston, just as Arizona State has in Torain.


Other tidbits on Torain:
-Listed by ESPN's Mel Kiper as the No. 2 senior running back in the nation entering the 2007 season.
-Ranks 13th in the nation and 2nd in the PAC-10 among returning backs in total rushing yards.
-ASU's second-leading returning receiver for 2007 and leads all returning PAC-10 tailbacks in yards-per-catch average (11.4) and touchdown receptions (three). So this guy is a threat in the secondary as well.


Although there are some in that list above that Torain doesn't compare to stats-wise, we have to keep in mind what he was up against all last season. Inconsistent quarterbacking resulting from an injured Rudy Carpenter (two fractures to his throwing hand going into the Colorado game, another broken bone in the other hand during the Cal game), the controversy surrounding Sam Keller's departure to Nebraska, mediocre ho-hum coaching which will kill any chance of title contention no matter how strong your talent is, route-running mistakes, no go-to receivers nor a passing attack to open up running lanes (when your Tight End is your main go-to receiver, your passing game is in trouble), and a defense that gave up an average of 27.4 points per game against the other nine PAC-10 teams last season (three of those nine PAC-10 opponents racked up more than 40 points).

But this year there should be hope in Tempe. Number-one: Dennis Erickson has taken over. He's got a lot of talent and because of that alone you may see a vastly improved team within a year or two tops. And personally I think he'll be there to stay because he's getting older now and probably looking for a place to bring about championships glory and then retire (ala Steve Spurrier).

Also, an apparently healed Carpenter has been reported to have improved drastically during the spring game, experience returning at the offensive line, the receiver corps should open up quite a bit with senior Rudy Burgess getting some help from sophomores Kyle Williams and Brandon Smith and an outstanding freshman in Rodney Glass. So it appears that the passing game has improved quite a bit on paper.

What does this mean for Torain? If Erickson can get the Sun Devils back to their pass-happy happy-place, then the running lanes will open up all over for Torain. Which means that, if there's a good mix between passing and running, Torain should be scampering for an average of no less than 8 yards a carry, 3 of which will be him dragging a few linebackers with him for the first down. But he has to score a lot more TDs than he did last year.

Torain is the type of big back that allows you the reliable option to run when it's 3rd and 5, versus many teams who default to passing when they're in that situation. Put him in the backfield with Keegan Herring (4.37 forty in high school) and you have a serious backfield threat no matter what yardage situation you're facing.

Torain reminds me of Chad Jasmin, Chris Lancaster, and Jeff McCall, former Clemson bull-backs of yesteryear. Big and tough. Like trying to bring down a snapped bull that has a few too many banderillas in his back. If Torain grows bigger and stronger and stronger and faster and faster and bigger, then he may be the next John Riggins when he gets drafted.

But the defense looks to be in question. DT Michael Marquardt and DE Dexter Davis return to the line, which is a good thing, but there's no depth on said line. Josh Barrett returns at safety but the cornerback position appears to be questionable. Linebacker is a huge question mark, so junior college transfer Morris Wooten will absolutely have to step up and shine. If not then all bets are off.

If this defense allows opponents to score at will then this season may not be all that different from last season's. The offense will continually have to play catch-up with their opponents and that's not exactly a morale booster for any offense, because it's like you're fighting your own defense more than you're fighting the opponent's. The defense must gel and do so quickly to help the offense out.

Add to the defensive questions the fact that the Sun Devils haven't selected a kicker. And kicking problems could be an Achilles heel - just ask Clemson head coach Tommy Bowden.

According to the Sun Devils' official website, Arizona State's first four games are at home. About a solid month to work out the kinks in front of the home crowd. But ideally they better git-er-done by the 4th game; Oregon State. The same team that destroyed them 44-10 in Corvallis last season. A vengeance win over the Beavs will be a serious morale booster and may very well set the tone for the rest of the season.

If the Sun Devils can come out with a winning conference record and end the regular season with 9 wins, plus win their bowl game, that will be a 10-win season and will obviously be considered marked improvement. And if that happens, expect Torain to be in outside Heisman contention and his NFL draft stock to up a bit. But for him to get serious trophy consideration and for pro scouts to drool, he has to score a lot more touchdowns. At least double from last year, minimum. Because we all know the Heisman people only really vote on playmakers from popular, winning teams.

Originally I thought "well, ASU will also have to get to a BCS bowl for Torain to get serious consideration." Maybe not. Because Arkansas' Darren McFadden was 2nd in Heisman voting last year and the Hogs weren't even in the BCS. Matter of fact, Arkansas capped off a 3-game losing skid to Wisconsin in the Capital-One Bowl, where Darren McFadden only scored 2 TDs in those games. If Arkansas' current internal problems negatively impact the field of play in '07, and Darren McFadden suffers for it, Torain (and others) will be able to capitalize on that.

So, say Erickson gets his boys into the Holiday Bowl this year and they whip the 3rd best the Big XII has to offer (which at this point looks like Nebraska, and what a game that will be watching ASU go up against traitor Sam Keller) and Torain goes into that bowl game with, say, 15 TDs and then gets in the end zone at least twice in the bowl, then I expect Torain to be in the top-5 in Heisman voting topped off with an all-expense paid trip to NYC



http://www.darrenmcfadden.org/darren-mcfadden-news06212007.php

Tned
06-11-2008, 11:11 PM
http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/94102

He can elude tacklers by running over and shifting by them, and he is a dangerous receiving option out of the backfield. As a result, Torain has built an eye-popping list of preseason accolades.

ESPN’s Mel Kiper lists him as the nation’s No. 2-rated senior running back, and Phil Steele’s respected College Football 2007 Preview tabs him as a second-team All-American — ahead of Michael Hart of Michigan and Ray Rice of Rutgers, two backs that are being mentioned in Heisman Trophy conversation.

So, because of his injury, we will never know what might have been with a full senior season, but at the same time I don't think the term "scrub" applies.

Simple Jaded
06-11-2008, 11:16 PM
Prior to his foot injury, several college scouting reports had him around the top 5 in terms of running backs as he entered his senior year.


Mel Kiper, for example, had him Top5 SENIOR RB's, that's not exactly a ringing endorsement considering the lack of talent among the SR's. I haven't had much success finding many people rating him as high as Top5 overall, at least, not until he became a Bronco.

Yeah, I've heard all the "1st round talent"/"Before his injury" chatter, I'm just not buying it.

Look, I'm not claiming to be a scout, but I've seen Torain play a handful of times......there is absolutely nothing special about Ryan Torain, imo.

He'll be a good player for the Broncos, just what they are looking for, he'll most likely go on to run for that Mythical 1000 yards and prove me wrong in every Bronco fans mind......but there is nothing special about Ryan Torain (Mike Anderson ran for nearly 1500, he's nothing special either).

But, all he has to do is improve on Henry's 4 rushing TD's and he's worth the 5th round pick, and with the success the Broncos have had drafting in Shanahan's era, that should be all Broncos fans could expect......

Simple Jaded
06-11-2008, 11:23 PM
http://www.darrenmcfadden.org/darren-mcfadden-news06212007.php

Tned, this is from a blog of a Darren McFadden fan. He's hardly Mel Kiper V2.0!

No disrespect, T, but his guy's opinion means nothing to me.

Sorry, I don't mean to be a dick, but give me Ray Rice any day......

Tned
06-12-2008, 12:02 AM
Tned, this is from a blog of a Darren McFadden fan. He's hardly Mel Kiper V2.0!

No disrespect, T, but his guy's opinion means nothing to me.

Sorry, I don't mean to be a dick, but give me Ray Rice any day......

No, actually it was from realfootball360 (http://www.realfootball365.com/index.php/articles/arizonastate/9872) and was probably created by an ASU fan. I happen to find it on the Dmac site and the link to RF360 was broken. However, one of the points of posting it was yet another quote about Kiper having him as the number 2 senior.

Also, want more:


Quarterback Rudy Carpenter (2,523 yards, 23 TDs, 14 INTs) is back to guide an offense that returns 10 starters including one of the nation’s best tailbacks Ryan Torain (1,229 yards, 7 TDs). Like their rival Arizona, the entire offensive line is back.

http://notredame.scout.com/2/657998.html




Running backs poised to make run at Heisman
Arkansas' McFadden leads talented group of returning ball carriers

Even the Pac-10 — land of sunshine and prolific passers — has a few running backs with All-American ability.

Oregon State’s Yvenson Bernard (1,307 yards rushing last season) returns along with Arizona State’s Ryan Torain (1,229) and Oregon’s Jonathan Stewart (981).

“He’s physical,” Arizona State coach Dennis Erickson said of Torain. “He has a chance to break tackles and take it to the house. He also gets the tough yard. ... The thing about Ryan is that he’s a pleasure because he does a lot and doesn’t say much. There’s a lot of those guys that say a lot and don’t do much, but he’s just the opposite of that.”

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/20206495/


7. Ryan Torain (6-foot-1, 213-pounds), Arizona State (Sr.)

Nicknamed "Train", Torain is the most underrated running back in the country. A former JUCO transfer, his first season with the Sun Devils was a memorable one as he rushed for 1,229 yards and seven touchdowns. Torain combines size, speed, strength, and vision to his impressive game and showed flashes of greatness against California last season. He rushed for 191 yards on 24 carries and a touchdown in a 49-21 loss to the Golden Bears. Despite the loss, Torain showed his promise… Choo Choo.

http://profootballexperts.scout.com/2/671086.html


Granted, this is from a forum, quoting Kiper, but assuming the guy didn't make it up:


Some Interesting movements in Kipers Top Seniors by Position

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Running Backs
1. Jacob Hester, LSU
2. Ryan Torain, Arizona State
3. Tashard Choice, Georgia Tech
4. Mike Hart, Michigan
5. Allen Patrick, Oklahoma
http://www.tigerforums.com/tigers-den/60702-some-interesting-movements-kipers-top-seniors-position.html


Sporting News Pac-10 preview -- The Sporting News. St. Louis: Aug 20, 2007. Vol. 231, Iss. 34; pg. 48, 1 pgs. No link, as it came from a clipping service.


SCOUTS VIEWS

Oregon peaked in 2001 and hasn't been the same since. The toughest guy on that team is RB Jonathan Stewart - he's a man when he's healthy- and that's not a good sign. * California QB Nate Longshore is too stiff for me. He can make all the throws, and if he has time, he can really hurt you. But if he's pressured, he's average. Reminds me of John Navarre at Michigan a few years ago. * I love watching Arizona State RB Ryan Torain. Man, does that kid bring it. He's a solid package; he plays like he's 235 pounds. They've got a good offensive line. If I'm Denny (Erickson, ASU coach), I run Torain 25 times a game.


Paint by numbers. By: Hayes, Matt, Sporting News, 0038805X, 7/16/2007, Vol. 231, Issue 29

Underrated
Ryan Torain, RB, Arizona State
Nine of 10 college football fans have no idea who Ryan Torain is. The answer: the guy who brought it in big games.

In seven games against teams with winning records, Torain rushed for 725 yards and a 6.2-yard average. In six games against teams with losing records, he had 504 yards and a 4.8 average.

Against the Pac-10's four best defenses (USC, UCLA, Arizona and California--with three of the games on the road), Torain ran for 464 yards and averaged 5.3. He played significantly better in six road games (622 yards, three TDs) than his six home contests (447,three).

So, there is a smattering of pre-2007 comments about Torain.

I'm sure given time, I could come up with more.

I am not saying this guy is going to be the next TD, Eric Dickerson or Emmit Smith, but at the same time, based on the opinion scouts had of him entering the 2007 season, the term scrub is way out of bounds, IMO.

shank
06-12-2008, 12:02 AM
"they say you can't please all the people all the time; and last night all those people were at my show."

-mitch hedburg

look, i was one of the people who really wanted a 1st round running back, but you have to pick your positions. you can't get first day picks at every position, and when you have one position that you can get good production out of low round talent, then i completely understand how it can seem to drop on your list of priorities when adding talent to your team.

Requiem / The Dagda
06-12-2008, 12:21 AM
Torain was a prospect SoCal and I thought a lot of before he got injured after about six games. He ran with authority his first year at ASU and carried that on into his second year. There's no doubt that if he was healthy, he'd of been a Top 100 guy -- heck, supposedly the Steelers were going to get him at 88. I think he'll do very well here.

Scarface
06-12-2008, 07:32 AM
I agree......but being a star in this offense doesn't mean he's really a star quality RB. See: Anderson, Droughns, Gary, Bell.

I, for one, haven't forgotten anything, I know exactly why Bronco RB's are annually overrated. Turner plays a huge role in that.

Btw, the fact that Pittsburgh wanted Torain as a PlanB (Parcells wanted Clarett too, didn't he?) proves one thing I've been saying all along: The best run organizations would still rather have a Mendenhall.

The Broncos, on the other hand, would rather scavenge through the bargain bin and then just tell you he's a Mendenhall.

Now if Torain does well here (And he probably will), think of what a Mendenhall could do. Just because you can get by with scrubs like Torain, it doesn't mean you have to......

Or we just needed a LT.

lex
06-12-2008, 08:52 AM
I agree......but being a star in this offense doesn't mean he's really a star quality RB. See: Anderson, Droughns, Gary, Bell.

I, for one, haven't forgotten anything, I know exactly why Bronco RB's are annually overrated. Turner plays a huge role in that.

Btw, the fact that Pittsburgh wanted Torain as a PlanB (Parcells wanted Clarett too, didn't he?) proves one thing I've been saying all along: The best run organizations would still rather have a Mendenhall.

The Broncos, on the other hand, would rather scavenge through the bargain bin and then just tell you he's a Mendenhall.

Now if Torain does well here (And he probably will), think of what a Mendenhall could do. Just because you can get by with scrubs like Torain, it doesn't mean you have to......

If I could give this 1,000 high fives, I would.

underrated29
06-12-2008, 09:03 AM
excuse me here,


CHRIS WELLS.

Have a nice day.

lex
06-12-2008, 09:04 AM
I agree......but being a star in this offense doesn't mean he's really a star quality RB. See: Anderson, Droughns, Gary, Bell.

I, for one, haven't forgotten anything, I know exactly why Bronco RB's are annually overrated. Turner plays a huge role in that.

Btw, the fact that Pittsburgh wanted Torain as a PlanB (Parcells wanted Clarett too, didn't he?) proves one thing I've been saying all along: The best run organizations would still rather have a Mendenhall.

The Broncos, on the other hand, would rather scavenge through the bargain bin and then just tell you he's a Mendenhall.

Now if Torain does well here (And he probably will), think of what a Mendenhall could do. Just because you can get by with scrubs like Torain, it doesn't mean you have to......

And lets also not forget we chose a return guy over a RB. A RB carries the ball on about half of a teams offensive plays...possibly from 20-35 a game. How many times does a return man carry the ball?

lex
06-12-2008, 09:05 AM
excuse me here,


CHRIS WELLS.

Have a nice day.


We have no chance at Chris Wells...unless he's injured next year and is in a wheel chair, in which case, we most definitely would draft him.

Ziggy
06-12-2008, 09:11 AM
This is the Madden generation. Half the people on this board wanted to take a RB in round 1. It's the sexy pick. Since we didn't get a Mendenhall or Stewart, some are going to call just about any other RB a scrub. That's fine. I'll take the gamble on improving the LOS with the high pick over improving the skill positions with the sexy pick every time. That's just me. I'm an old-school fan who believes what my sig says.

Torrain is getting called a scrub before he even plays a down in the NFL. Again, that's fine. I'll let the kid prove that he is or isn't a scrub before I pass judgement. I'm just crazy that way.

lex
06-12-2008, 09:21 AM
This is the Madden generation. Half the people on this board wanted to take a RB in round 1. It's the sexy pick. Since we didn't get a Mendenhall or Stewart, some are going to call just about any other RB a scrub. That's fine. I'll take the gamble on improving the LOS with the high pick over improving the skill positions with the sexy pick every time. That's just me. I'm an old-school fan who believes what my sig says.

Torrain is getting called a scrub before he even plays a down in the NFL. Again, that's fine. I'll let the kid prove that he is or isn't a scrub before I pass judgement. I'm just crazy that way.

Have you ever seen him play in college? And actually, I think a lot of people have relented on taking an OL. Whether you wanted a RB or a OL in Rd 1, most agreed we needed to improve the running game. But then we take a kick returner in the 2nd. And if youre going to go bargain basement, it merits scrutiny that they took Torain, where they took Torain, and the other options available.

I realize people try to attempt to simplify things and label it as being old-school (or not madden gen) but its kind of head in the sand. Likewise its easier to make blanket statements that dont really apply to the people you stand in disagreement with most. Again, your take on the Rd 1 bit is erroneous and its evident in the thread. Not to mention the fact that Link has said he has actually seen him play in college and wasnt impressed. And its also worth pointing out that he said there is a segment of people (apparently like you) who like him just because he is a Bronco and willl get all worked up because he does well...which doesnt mean much in our offense. Link is saying we could do better than Torain, whatever he does. You seem to be saying that if Torain does well (like Gary, Anderson, Bell, etc) its good enough for you. Link is right. We're minimizing a strength with this bargain basement approach.

Ziggy
06-12-2008, 09:42 AM
Have you ever seen him play in college? And actually, I think a lot of people have relented on taking an OL. Whether you wanted a RB or a OL in Rd 1, most agreed we needed to improve the running game. But then we take a kick returner in the 2nd. And if youre going to go bargain basement, it merits scrutiny that they took Torain, where they took Torain, and the other options available.

I realize people try to attempt to simplify things and label it as being old-school (or not madden gen) but its kind of head in the sand. Likewise its easier to make blanket statements that dont really apply to the people you stand in disagreement with most. Again, your take on the Rd 1 bit is erroneous and its evident in the thread. Not to mention the fact that Link has said he has actually seen him play in college and wasnt impressed. And its also worth pointing out that he said there is a segment of people (apparently like you) who like him just because he is a Bronco and willl get all worked up because he does well...which doesnt mean much in our offense. Link is saying we could do better than Torain, whatever he does. You seem to be saying that if Torain does well (like Gary, Anderson, Bell, etc) its good enough for you. Link is right. We're minimizing a strength with this bargain basement approach.


Yes, I have seen him play in college. He's a one cut and go power runner. Just the kind of running back we need around here. Link and you may say that we can do better than Torrain, and we might have been able to. I'll let his play on the field prove whether or not that's true. I'm no GM. I'll let him, like very other draft pick make thier case on the field in the NFL. As far as having a head in the sand approach as you say, I think you cornered the market on that when you started disowning a Bronco on draft day before he even arrived in Denver.

mopatt24
06-12-2008, 09:47 AM
Arent we gettin guys who fit our system, instead of guys who are the "sexy picks"? Plus, who to say that Mendenhall would be a better pick for us, when he was a 1 year wonder himself at ILL. His brother was a better runner then he was.

Could we have done better then Torain? Prob so, but I wouldnt call him a bargain basement type approach just yet. I watched him play as well, and before the lisfranc
he could have been a second rounder and would a good combine, crept into the first. Before we pass judgement on him or any rookie, let him strap the pads on and show us what he's got

lex
06-12-2008, 10:09 AM
Arent we gettin guys who fit our system, instead of guys who are the "sexy picks"? Plus, who to say that Mendenhall would be a better pick for us, when he was a 1 year wonder himself at ILL. His brother was a better runner then he was.

Could we have done better then Torain? Prob so, but I wouldnt call him a bargain basement type approach just yet. I watched him play as well, and before the lisfranc
he could have been a second rounder and would a good combine, crept into the first. Before we pass judgement on him or any rookie, let him strap the pads on and show us what he's got

I stand in agreement with Link. He's nothing to get THAT excited about. Like I said, I thought Herring was the better RB on that team. Besides that, its kind of interesting how people think slow, plodding RB = fits our system. Thats a myth you see all the time. Its like people have something against RBs who are fast and explosive. Another myth is that people seem to equate the slow, plodding RBs with being more durable. As far as we can tell, Keegan Herring is more durable than Torain and Herring is faster and more explosive than Torain.

Rex
06-12-2008, 10:12 AM
This is the Madden generation. Half the people on this board wanted to take a RB in round 1. It's the sexy pick. Since we didn't get a Mendenhall or Stewart, some are going to call just about any other RB a scrub. That's fine. I'll take the gamble on improving the LOS with the high pick over improving the skill positions with the sexy pick every time. That's just me. I'm an old-school fan who believes what my sig says.

Torrain is getting called a scrub before he even plays a down in the NFL. Again, that's fine. I'll let the kid prove that he is or isn't a scrub before I pass judgement. I'm just crazy that way.

bravo

lex
06-12-2008, 10:13 AM
Yes, I have seen him play in college. He's a one cut and go power runner. Just the kind of running back we need around here. Link and you may say that we can do better than Torrain, and we might have been able to. I'll let his play on the field prove whether or not that's true. I'm no GM. I'll let him, like very other draft pick make thier case on the field in the NFL. As far as having a head in the sand approach as you say, I think you cornered the market on that when you started disowning a Bronco on draft day before he even arrived in Denver.

My head is not in the sand. Quite the opposite. There is an opportunity cost with Torain. Whenever he runs for 120, there will always be a legitimate question that another RB could have gone for 150. But youre saying the 120 will legitimize him. Thats simply not so. That just means we REALLY missed out.

BOSSHOGG30
06-12-2008, 10:18 AM
This is the Madden generation. Half the people on this board wanted to take a RB in round 1. It's the sexy pick. Since we didn't get a Mendenhall or Stewart, some are going to call just about any other RB a scrub. That's fine. I'll take the gamble on improving the LOS with the high pick over improving the skill positions with the sexy pick every time. That's just me. I'm an old-school fan who believes what my sig says.

Torrain is getting called a scrub before he even plays a down in the NFL. Again, that's fine. I'll let the kid prove that he is or isn't a scrub before I pass judgement. I'm just crazy that way.

Panthers selected Stewart and still got Otah........they my friend did the right thing...wait and see.. I much rather have Jonathan Stewart and Jeff Otah than I would Clady and Torain

Scouts are gett better and better evaluating talent and Torian didn't go that late just because..... I wouldn't consider him a scub, but he sure the heck isn't an all world talent that some Broncos fans are trying to spin him to be now that he is downing the Orange and Blue. The homer is setting in. Every year we go through this.... We are hopeful that our late round or undrafted runningback will become that stud that we had with TD... well odds are we will be waiting awhile because finding a stub back in the late rounds is very rare, but Shanny hasn't learned that yet. Good thing we have a runningback friendly system and one of the best running back coaches in the history of the NFL, because we will need it. We have very average backs at best.

lex
06-12-2008, 10:20 AM
Panthers selected Stewart and still got Otah........they my friend did the right thing...wait and see.. I much rather have Jonathan Stewart and Jeff Otah than I would Clady and Torain

Scouts are gett better and better evaluating talent and Torian didn't go that late just because..... I wouldn't consider him a scub, but he sure the heck isn't an all world talent that some Broncos fans are trying to spin him to be now that he is downing the Orange and Blue. The homer is setting in. Every year we go through this.... We are hopeful that our late round or undrafted runningback will become that stud that we had with TD... well odds are we will be waiting awhile because finding a stub back in the late rounds is very rare, but Shanny hasn't learned that yet. Good thing we have a runningback friendly system and one of the best running back coaches in the history of the NFL, because we will need it. We have very average backs at best.

What poppycock. You are obviously a Madden gen fan.

Rex
06-12-2008, 10:21 AM
Panthers selected Stewart and still got Otah........they my friend did the right thing...wait and see.. I much rather have Jonathan Stewart and Jeff Otah than I would Clady and Torain

Scouts are gett better and better evaluating talent and Torian didn't go that late just because..... I wouldn't consider him a scub, but he sure the heck isn't an all world talent that some Broncos fans are trying to spin him to be now that he is downing the Orange and Blue. The homer is setting in. Every year we go through this.... We are hopeful that our late round or undrafted runningback will become that stud that we had with TD... well odds are we will be waiting awhile because finding a stub back in the late rounds is very rare, but Shanny hasn't learned that yet. Good thing we have a runningback friendly system and one of the best running back coaches in the history of the NFL, because we will need it. We have very average backs at best.

Yeah. I am still holding out for Tony Hunt too....but I dont get emotionally attached to players.

BOSSHOGG30
06-12-2008, 10:37 AM
Yeah. I am still holding out for Tony Hunt too....but I dont get emotionally attached to players.

Tony Hunt would be a great addition with Selvin Young. Plus, he wouldn't have cost us a 1st rounder... this was obviously a pick using the theory that you are all protecting Torian with. They are very similar players but neither will be studs or all world talents. I more or less saying right now we need to go out and get a 1st round or 2nd round stud runningback that we can rely on. Twice now we past on stud backs when we had the need and the chance.... D.J. Williams over Steve Jackson and now Clady over Stewart. The other years I don't feel there was back of this caliber nor did we have that big of a need with what was there. This year we may of needed a OT, but the OL depth was very good and we could of waited on OL and got that All stud and very rare RB talent, especiallly if you take in account were we normally draft at each year.

turftoad
06-12-2008, 11:29 AM
My head is not in the sand. Quite the opposite. There is an opportunity cost with Torain. Whenever he runs for 120, there will always be a legitimate question that another RB could have gone for 150. But youre saying the 120 will legitimize him. Thats simply not so. That just means we REALLY missed out.

LOL........... you guys make me laugh. I'm not putting words in your mouth but it sounds like you're saying, even if Torain runs for 120yrd per game, he's still a scrub because he's not getting 150yrds per game?

No matter what he does, you're just never going to like him.

turftoad
06-12-2008, 11:32 AM
Panthers selected Stewart and still got Otah........they my friend did the right thing...wait and see.. I much rather have Jonathan Stewart and Jeff Otah than I would Clady and Torain

Scouts are gett better and better evaluating talent and Torian didn't go that late just because..... I wouldn't consider him a scub, but he sure the heck isn't an all world talent that some Broncos fans are trying to spin him to be now that he is downing the Orange and Blue. The homer is setting in. Every year we go through this.... We are hopeful that our late round or undrafted runningback will become that stud that we had with TD... well odds are we will be waiting awhile because finding a stub back in the late rounds is very rare, but Shanny hasn't learned that yet. Good thing we have a runningback friendly system and one of the best running back coaches in the history of the NFL, because we will need it. We have very average backs at best.

We wouldn't have gotten stewart and Otah.

We took Clady at #12. There were 8 tackles taken in the first round. No decent ones left in the second or third. Had we drafted a RB in the first, we wouldn't have filled a need at OT cuz there weren't any there in the second.

Now post a bunch of scenerios that we could have gotten a RB and an OT in the first. Jeeesh.........

BOSSHOGG30
06-12-2008, 11:34 AM
LOL........... you guys make me laugh. I'm not putting words in your mouth but it sounds like you're saying, even if Torain runs for 120yrd per game, he's still a scrub because he's not getting 150yrds per game?

No matter what he does, you're just never going to like him.

No we are saying that any back can get yards in our system... yards isn't the problem... it is constantly moving the chains and scoring TD's! This is important to our offense and our defenses success. Anyone can get yards...and 1,000 yards is nothing for a running back these days. The best years Denver has had is when our running game has scored 20 + rushing TD's in a season. Some of the best backs just have a nack for getting into the endzone.......

BOSSHOGG30
06-12-2008, 11:37 AM
We wouldn't have gotten stewart and Otah.

We took Clady at #12. There were 8 tackles taken in the first round. No decent ones left in the second or third. Had we drafted a RB in the first, we wouldn't have filled a need at OT cuz there weren't any there in the second.

Now post a bunch of scenerios that we could have gotten a RB and an OT in the first. Jeeesh.........

Panthers selected Stewart after we did, and Otah after we selected in the 2nd round.... So I find it hard to believe that we couldn't have gotten a Stewart and a good OT in the 2nd round. Instead we get a project OT and a punt returner

Ziggy
06-12-2008, 11:42 AM
LOL........... you guys make me laugh. I'm not putting words in your mouth but it sounds like you're saying, even if Torain runs for 120yrd per game, he's still a scrub because he's not getting 150yrds per game?

No matter what he does, you're just never going to like him.


And no matter what he does, they'll say that someone else would have done it better in Denver. Some folks had thier mind made up the minute we drafted Clady at 12 and left the top 2 rated backs on the board. We can talk till we're blue in the face Turf, but they've tried and convicted Torrain as a bust before he ever put on the orange and blue. It's a shame.

turftoad
06-12-2008, 11:42 AM
No we are saying that any back can get yards in our system... yards isn't the problem... it is constantly moving the chains and scoring TD's! This is important to our offense and our defenses success. Anyone can get yards...and 1,000 yards is nothing for a running back these days. The best years Denver has had is when our running game has scored 20 + rushing TD's in a season. Some of the best backs just have a nack for getting into the endzone.......

I agree Boss. That said, it takes more than just 1 RB to do so. It takes the WHOLE offense.
Our offenseive line was always top ranked when we were running for 20 plus TD's.
It hasn't been top ranked for quite a while.

BroncoJoe
06-12-2008, 11:43 AM
Plus, that KR/PR has been impressing everyone playing the slot. He's going to be more than just a return man.

Lonestar
06-12-2008, 11:46 AM
I agree Boss. That said, it takes more than just 1 RB to do so. It takes the WHOLE offense.
Our offenseive line was always top ranked when we were running for 20 plus TD's.
It hasn't been top ranked for quite a while.

alot of that has to do with them getting older and now only one player from Gibbs days still on the OLINE..

Regardless Gibbs was the master and having dennison an ex LB teaching Gibbs' system well.. is like having your dentist remove your appendix..

Lonestar
06-12-2008, 11:48 AM
Plus, that KR/PR has been impressing everyone playing the slot. He's going to be more than just a return man.


and he is gonna be on the filed how many snaps each game 8-10? opposed to a real RB that will be on the field 98% of the snaps only on the sidelines to catch his breath after a long run.

That makes loads of sense to me..