PDA

View Full Version : No coincidence Pats can't solve Broncos



omac
05-25-2008, 12:59 AM
http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_9363445


No coincidence Pats can't solve Broncos
By Mike Klis
The Denver Post
Article Launched: 05/24/2008 12:30:00 AM MDT


Guarantee you that no one in the Denver media is surprised the New England Patriots have done a poor job of cracking the Broncos' signals.

Is it possible for a team to guard its practices and game plans more than Mike Shanahan's Broncos? This organization may have laid off eight front-office and stadium employees two months ago, but those strong men with dark sunglasses and crossed arms continue to peer beyond the stone wall that surrounds the Dove Valley practice fields.

In the latest revelation of Spygate, evidence is overwhelming the Patriots had been illegally videotaping opposing coaches' signals from the 2000 season until the first game of 2007, when the New York Jets finally snitched.

Many teams were identified as victims, but not the Broncos. The Pats are 1-5 against the Broncos since the start of the 2001 season.

The Broncos' secretive nature, and their success against the Pats, can't be a coincidence.

Don't ask Broncos tight end Daniel Graham about the Pats' past practices. The future is fine, but Graham did not come to Dove Valley to talk about the past.

"I could care less about what the Patriots do," Graham said. "I don't play for them anymore. I'm a Bronco now. I look forward to playing them this year. But I don't have that game circled on the schedule, yet. We've got Oakland first."

Now, that's a well-schooled football player. All players are conditioned to live in the now. Which is why an estimated zero players are losing sleep over the possibility NFL owners will lock them out in 2011. Most players understand they will be lucky if they're part of a 2011 lockout.

"Maybe I'll be on 'Dancing with the Stars' by then," said John Lynch, laughing in reference an Internet blog suggesting he would be an ideal candidate for the popular show.

Even the Broncos' game Oct. 20 in Foxborough isn't worth more than a cursory glance (and perhaps an early prayer that Tom Brady plays on a sprained ankle), not when Denver opens in the Black Hole on Sept. 8.

As for Graham, chances are he's younger than you think. That 2002 Super Bowl when the Patriots didn't illegally videotape, but did illegally observe, the walkthrough of their heavily favored opponent, the St. Louis Rams?

Graham still belonged to the University of Colorado at the time. It wasn't until a few months later that Graham became the Patriots' first-round draft choice and later helped them win two more Super Bowls.

"I wasn't with them for that Super Bowl against the Rams, so whatever happened doesn't concern me," Graham said.

Other than 18 meaningless games, the Pats haven't won a thing without him. The Broncos won only seven meaningless games with Graham last year, but in the end, what difference does it make how many you've won unless you win the Big One?

Graham thinks both he and the only team he cares about will have a much better season this year. He had 24 catches as a blocking tight end for the 7-9 Broncos in 2007, even though he essentially missed the final three games with a high ankle sprain.

"I feel real good," he said. "The offense is coming much easier to me this year. I don't have to stop and think about what I'm supposed to do like I did at this time last year. I'm much more relaxed and comfortable with the system. I think we're going to have a real good offense this year."

Graham was talking seconds after the Broncos completed one of the offseason practices last week that the media was not allowed to observe past the team stretch. When Graham was finished offering nothing about his past, he turned and walked toward the Broncos' locker room, where the media is forbidden except for select days during the regular season.

If the Pats are going to beat the Broncos on Oct. 20, they'll have to beat them fair and square.

Mike Klis: 303-954-1055 or mklis@denverpost.com

Funny, I made a comment recently on one of the Pats cheating threads implying that it's one of the reasons the Pats couldn't get an upper hand on the Broncos.

The article does say something that hasn't been covered a lot; the value of Daniel Graham. I'm pretty sure Bellichick would've wanted his blocking skills for Brady during the Superbowl.

topscribe
05-25-2008, 01:03 AM
So how did Pittsburgh manage to slip past the guards?? http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/hh256/AZDynamics/Smilies/thdissappointed.gif

-----

omac
05-25-2008, 01:07 AM
So how did Pittsburgh manage to slip past the guards?? http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/hh256/AZDynamics/Smilies/thdissappointed.gif

-----

Huh?

Superchop 7
05-25-2008, 01:11 AM
I seem to recall opposing teams telling the Broncos that they knew what play was coming.

The smartest teams send in 2 plays and then let the QB call which one he wants.

omac
05-25-2008, 01:18 AM
I seem to recall opposing teams telling the Broncos that they knew what play was coming.

The smartest teams send in 2 plays and then let the QB call the one he wants.

Are you talking about Parcells saying the Broncos just run a few offensive plays but from different formations? Since the Broncos have been pretty good offensively, I doubt the defenses really knew what were coming and were unable to stop them.

Or are you talking about reading the defensive signals? Or just predictability of playcalling? I doubt they were able to steal signals too effectively.

Watchthemiddle
05-25-2008, 02:11 AM
THere really is no way to steal an offensive signal with the helmet ear pieces.

And now this season, with the MLB having one the signal calling from the sidelines might be a thing of the past.

The reason why the Pats can't beat the Broncos is because of preperation on our part. Its too bad we don't prepare against all teams the way we do for the Pats.

Northman
05-25-2008, 02:14 AM
I seem to recall opposing teams telling the Broncos that they knew what play was coming.

The smartest teams send in 2 plays and then let the QB call which one he wants.

I do recall Favre claiming that Denver knew what was coming during the Super Bowl but never heard anything more on that.

Superchop 7
05-25-2008, 02:43 AM
It was the Raiders.

TXBRONC
05-25-2008, 07:05 PM
THere really is no way to steal an offensive signal with the helmet ear pieces.

And now this season, with the MLB having one the signal calling from the sidelines might be a thing of the past.

The reason why the Pats can't beat the Broncos is because of preperation on our part. Its too bad we don't prepare against all teams the way we do for the Pats.

Come on WTM I'm sure the Broncos prepare for every team the same way. However, that doesn't mean you'll always get the results you're looking for.

Den21vsBal19
05-25-2008, 07:10 PM
THere really is no way to steal an offensive signal with the helmet ear pieces.

And now this season, with the MLB having one the signal calling from the sidelines might be a thing of the past.

The reason why the Pats can't beat the Broncos is because of preperation on our part. Its too bad we don't prepare against all teams the way we do for the Pats.
But didn't the Pats also have a problem with the radios at their place for a number of games?

sisterhellfyre
05-26-2008, 10:39 AM
I do recall Favre claiming that Denver knew what was coming during the Super Bowl but never heard anything more on that.

The Bronco offense knew what was coming from the Packer defense, yes. It was in the SI writeup after the game. In the film studies before the game Shanahan noticed that Leroy Butler consistently started plays in one of several positions, depending on the defensive call. I don't recall the specifics, but Shanahan & Kubiak worked backward from Butler's starting position to deduce the defensive calls coming in. That foreknowledge put the Packer defense at a significant disadvantage.

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if Greg Robinson and the defensive staff found similar cues for the Packer offense. Elway had one of the great giveaway cues himself: when he was going to throw deep, he patted the ball with his left hand while dropping back. I never watched Favre enough to notice if he had similar giveaways.

Regards,
m.

denbroncofan26
05-26-2008, 11:14 PM
But didn't the Pats also have a problem with the radios at their place for a number of games?

Or so they claimed....If you were illegally blocking a visiting teams playcalls, wouldn't you try to act like a victim as well and pretend your communications are jammed too. Im not saying that is for sure what happened, all Im saying is that one team claiming to have bad comm. lines does not stand as proof of anything.

Lonestar
05-26-2008, 11:51 PM
The Bronco offense knew what was coming from the Packer defense, yes. It was in the SI writeup after the game. In the film studies before the game Shanahan noticed that Leroy Butler consistently started plays in one of several positions, depending on the defensive call. I don't recall the specifics, but Shanahan & Kubiak worked backward from Butler's starting position to deduce the defensive calls coming in. That foreknowledge put the Packer defense at a significant disadvantage.

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if Greg Robinson and the defensive staff found similar cues for the Packer offense. Elway had one of the great giveaway cues himself: when he was going to throw deep, he patted the ball with his left hand while dropping back. I never watched Favre enough to notice if he had similar giveaways.

Regards,
m.


Whether this was true or not, by the time he was dropping back it would have been to late..

WARHORSE
05-26-2008, 11:52 PM
The reason Denver beats the Pats so soundly is because theres no scheming their run game when its on. Shanahan is not afraid to run the ball up the gut on the Pats, and when it comes to stoping the Broncos run game, even if everyone honors their gaps, you still cant stop it. You need to bring the eighth and ninth man in the box.

The 3-4 is predicated on being able to use the front seven to stop the run and rush the passer. If you cant do that, youre in a world of hurt.

Den21vsBal19
05-27-2008, 04:03 AM
Or so they claimed....If you were illegally blocking a visiting teams playcalls, wouldn't you try to act like a victim as well and pretend your communications are jammed too. Im not saying that is for sure what happened, all Im saying is that one team claiming to have bad comm. lines does not stand as proof of anything.
IIRC, according to league rules, if one team's radios go down, then the opposition's radios are disabled as well.

But if you've got the opposition's signals, and force them out of the comfort zone, you've definitely gained a competitive advantage

sneakers
05-27-2008, 06:43 AM
Nice read, thanks for posting! :cool:

TXBRONC
05-27-2008, 06:52 AM
The Bronco offense knew what was coming from the Packer defense, yes. It was in the SI writeup after the game. In the film studies before the game Shanahan noticed that Leroy Butler consistently started plays in one of several positions, depending on the defensive call. I don't recall the specifics, but Shanahan & Kubiak worked backward from Butler's starting position to deduce the defensive calls coming in. That foreknowledge put the Packer defense at a significant disadvantage.

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if Greg Robinson and the defensive staff found similar cues for the Packer offense. Elway had one of the great giveaway cues himself: when he was going to throw deep, he patted the ball with his left hand while dropping back. I never watched Favre enough to notice if he had similar giveaways.

Regards,
m.

Elway patted the ball, but it before he threw not as he was dropping back from what I recall.

What they did with Butler was take him out of tackle box by splitting Sharpe out wide and what that did was create room for TD to run.

red98
05-27-2008, 12:08 PM
Here is a good article from SI (the Vault) explaining how the Broncos went after Butler. It was more about getting a hat on him then formations.

http://vault.sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1011869/index.htm

NameUsedBefore
05-27-2008, 01:48 PM
IIRC, the one game we did lose to the Patriots we had Danny Kannel playing quarterback and Deltha O'Neal gave up a position on the Broncos when he gave up the game winning TD.

LordTrychon
05-27-2008, 02:02 PM
IIRC, the one game we did lose to the Patriots we had Danny Kannel playing quarterback and Deltha O'Neal gave up a position on the Broncos when he gave up the game winning TD.

The Kannel part is definately correct... and I believe the O'Neal part is as well. Then they also called Bill a genius for taking a safety on purpose. :rolleyes:


I just want to add what I added on the other forum... when I saw the title of this thread, I thought... the real reason the mastermind changes defensive coordinators every year is so that the hand signals are always different. :laugh:

TXBRONC
05-27-2008, 06:40 PM
The Kannel part is definately correct... and I believe the O'Neal part is as well. Then they also called Bill a genius for taking a safety on purpose. :rolleyes:


I just want to add what I added on the other forum... when I saw the title of this thread, I thought... the real reason the mastermind changes defensive coordinators every year is so that the hand signals are always different. :laugh:


Yeah Billacheat is a real genius.