Denver Native (Carol)
10-05-2010, 02:19 PM
http://www.denverpost.com/broncosmailbag/ci_16252980
Denver Post sports writer Mike Klis posts his Broncos Mailbag each Tuesday during the 2010 NFL season.
Pose a Broncos- or NFL-related question for the Broncos Mailbag.
I can't believe the Broncos are 2-2 without a running game. Eight rushing yards by running backs against the Titans, and they won? Are McDaniels and the Broncos thinking outside the box (literally) to prove that you don't need a running game to win in the NFL? That would change everything.
-- Scott, Denver
Running doesn't win in the NFL. You can't get there from here running the ball. Chris Johnson rushed for 2,006 yards last year and the Titans finished 8-8. Indianapolis ranked 32nd in rushing last year and were a 5-point favorite in the Super Bowl.
New Orleans, the defending Super Bowl champs, only ran the ball last year to give their receivers a breather and run out the clock in the fourth quarter. Those are the only two reasons, by the way, why a team needs to run as we move into the second decade of the 21st century — keep the receivers legs fresh and run out the fourth-quarter clock with a lead.
Blame the insignificance of a running attack on all these freak athletes on defense. Nose tackles like Jamal Williams are 350 pounds, strong as a bull and quick as a cat. Linebackers like D.J. Williams are 240 pounds, strong enough to mash the run and fast enough to cover Chris Johnson on pass patterns out of the backfield. Safeties like Brian Dawkins can cover a tight end, but more importantly load up like a linebacker to stop the run and blitz the quarterback.
The only way to avoid those physical specimens is to spread them out and throw the ball to where skill players have space. Granted, 8 yards on 17 carries from the backs is unacceptable. The Broncos have to do better than that.
But the reason the running game has to get better is so it can help their play-action passing game.
And they will improve. The Broncos will get better because their line will better. Their inexperienced
Kyle Orton may have been running for his life against the Titans on Sunday. But he led the Broncos in rushing yards. More photos. (Joe Amon, The Denver Post)
blockers (J.D. Walton, Stanley Daniels) will improve with each additional game of experience and their banged-up veterans (Ryan Clady, Chris Kuper, Ryan Harris) will improve as they get healthier.
There's a chance the Broncos could start becoming at least an adequate running team after their bye week in early November. Just in time for winter.
Hi, Mike. You mentioned the Broncos were discussing a long-term contract with Champ Bailey in your Sept. 10 article. Any news on that? He will make an excellent safety when he can't do solo corner work anymore as he is good at coverage and he is a tackling machine. -- Dave C., Irvine, Calif.
I don't think it's any coincidence contract talks resumed last week. The Sept. 10 article, which was written on Sept. 9, talked about how the Broncos and Bailey's agent, Jack Reale, were engaged in serious negotiations. Broncos general manager Brian Xanders acknowledged they were in discussions.
They were working off a four-year extension that would keep Bailey here through 2014. A proposal was submitted on Sept. 10 — but then the regular season opened Sept. 12 and the Broncos got busy with other things. Sadly, Kenny McKinley's death put several business matters on hold for a week.
But I don't think it's any coincidence that contract talk resumed a few days after the Indy game, after Bailey proved once again he is the Broncos' best and most valuable player. Seven days after walking out of Invesco Field at Mile High on crutches with a right heel injury, Bailey was out there shutting down Reggie Wayne. Did you see Wayne's numbers this week against Jacksonville? (15 catches for 196 yards, in case you didn't).
When is McDaniels going to start managing the game better? He called a timeout before the end of the half to kick a field goal and allowed plenty of time for Tennessee to kick a field goal before the half. Then in the second half he passed up a field goal that would have put him down by one with six minutes left only to fail on fourth down again. The defense was playing well and the coach almost cost them the game again. He should have learned after the Colts game. Is he ever going to learn?
-- Travis Harrison, United Arab Emirates
McDaniels admitted he goofed by calling a timeout with 23 seconds remaining in the half. I think because he went for it on fourth-and-3 in the red zone and failed in losses to Jacksonville and Indianapolis, he wanted time to think about whether to go for it on fourth-and-2 from the 18 against Tennessee.
He shouldn't have, and it did backfire as the Titans got in position for Rob Bironas' 55-yard field goal. But when a coach admits he made a mistake, it's easier to give him the benefit of the doubt. Coaches make hundreds of decisions on game day.
Going for it on fourth down is just the decision that gets scrutinized. Not that this is unfair. It's why head coaches make the really big bucks.
As for going for it on fourth-and-3 from the Tennessee 4 with 4:39 remaining and down 20-16 — I agreed with that decision.
I agreed this time and disagreed the previous week against Indianapolis when it was fourth-and-3 at the 12 with 8:49 remaining and the Colts leading 20-13. I thought the 4 provided better odds than the 12 and the time — 4 less minutes — made the situation a little more desperate.
The difference between winning and losing, as it turned out, was the defense. When fourth down didn't work out last week, Peyton Manning converted on third-and-15. The Titans got one first down from Chris Johnson but remained conservative and Vince Young couldn't convert a third-and-11.
Hi, Mike. I like the direction this team is going. Do you?
-- G. Restauri, Hamilton, Ontario
I believe the worst is behind the Broncos. That 3-10 skid dating back to last season will be looked back upon as "the dark days" of the McDaniels' era. I believe better days are ahead for the Broncos — regardless of what happens this Sunday at Baltimore.
There is something about beating a fierce, rugged opponent like Tennessee on the road that makes you think the Broncos are about to trend upward in their transition phase.
I know. I know. The Broncos can't run the ball. Their offensive line remains in a state of flux. And their kick coverage units have been poor. No doubt, the Broncos are a flawed team.
But look around the NFL, G. Name a team that isn't flawed. Pittsburgh might be the most complete team now that Ben Roethlisberger is back. But Peyton Manning's team can't play defense or run the ball. Drew Brees' team has kicker problems and suddenly the offense isn't nearly as explosive. Kansas City is about to hit the meat of its schedule.
Every team has problems. I think the Broncos have a chance for a successful season because their strengths are defense and passing the ball. And I think it's better to be terrible at running the ball than terrible at passing it.
During the Titans game, we kicked a field goal and made it. A flag was thrown (offsides/neutral zone infraction against defense), we accepted the penalty and rekicked (making it a second time). That doesn't make sense to me. Why did we accept it? Why wasn't it marked off on the ensuing kickoff?
-- Leon, Texas
It was a dead-ball infraction. No play. The officials were a tad tardy in blowing the play dead. The whistle should have blown before Lonie Paxton's long snap. It's not like McDaniels accepted the penalty because he wanted to see if Prater could make it from 35 yards out as well as 40. Then again, Prater has been automatic this year (8-for-8 in field goals). I also think that because he had to make it again, it was Prater's most impressive field goal of the young season.
How much time during the week do the Broncos spend practicing their special teams coverage? How can they be this bad? What can they do to fix it? -- Tim, Wyoming
I've got a theory. I think the fact the Broncos practice and play their home games in altitude hurts their special teams when they're on the road.
Now, hold on. Watch your language, mailbaggers, and hear me out. I think because Prater boots most of his kickoffs for touchbacks at home, it negatively effects the coverage on the road when he only occasionally reaches the end zone.
One, there's the fatigue factor. The kickoff team might only have to cover one or two kicks at home but five or six on the road. The more a guy sprints, the more speed he loses with each kickoff.
Two, the more times a kickoff coverage is employed, the more likely somebody is going to make a mistake.
And three, Prater's touchbacks at home may subconsciously lull the coverage guys into a false sense of security on the road.
It's the old can't-pitch-at-home, can't-hit-on-the-road issue the Rockies went through before and after the humidor.
Hey, Mike! About Peyton Hillis... when will Tebow... in the red zone... Ah, forget that stuff. Do you think John Elway will continue to get more involved with the Broncos to the point he will actually be making a few decisions for the team, maybe in a "part ownership" capacity? Or in any other way? It sure couldn't hurt, right?
-- Darrin Cothran, Spartanburg, S.C.
Darrin, your writing style shows promise. (There's something familiar about it.) The more I poke around this issue, the more I believe Pat Bowlen isn't selling nothing to nobody, as they say. As he's inferred many times before, Bowlen is going to own the Broncos until the day they put him in a pine box. May we be many years away from finding out what happens next.
Hi, Mike. I heard something on local sports radio that sounded like Denver is looking to deal Tim Tebow. Is that true? And if so, why?
-- Lana, Jacksonville, Fla.
I'm sure you either misheard your local radio yakker, or you needed a television to see the tongue planted firmly in yakker's cheek. Tebow isn't going anywhere unless Kyle Orton sprains an ankle. At that point, Tebow will exchange the ballcap and clipboard for a helmet and the huddle.
Mike, WHY don't the Broncos ever pull out the Orange Crush-era throwbacks? Not to mention, the CLASSIC blue helmet with the "D" on the side with the horse in the middle!
-- Chad Greenland, Denver
By throwback, you mean all the way back to 1996? Because while that bright-orange look is, as you suggest Chad, identified with the Orange Crush Broncos of the 1970s, John Elway wore the uniform most of his career.
It wasn't until 1997 that the Broncos went to the darker-blue, wide-stripe uniform scheme they wear now.
Chad, your proposal would be like hearing Nirvana and 2Pac songs on an oldies station. Let's not rush time. Let's put a few more years distance between now and 1996 before the Broncos get nostalgic for bright orange.
Denver Post sports writer Mike Klis posts his Broncos Mailbag each Tuesday during the 2010 NFL season.
Pose a Broncos- or NFL-related question for the Broncos Mailbag.
I can't believe the Broncos are 2-2 without a running game. Eight rushing yards by running backs against the Titans, and they won? Are McDaniels and the Broncos thinking outside the box (literally) to prove that you don't need a running game to win in the NFL? That would change everything.
-- Scott, Denver
Running doesn't win in the NFL. You can't get there from here running the ball. Chris Johnson rushed for 2,006 yards last year and the Titans finished 8-8. Indianapolis ranked 32nd in rushing last year and were a 5-point favorite in the Super Bowl.
New Orleans, the defending Super Bowl champs, only ran the ball last year to give their receivers a breather and run out the clock in the fourth quarter. Those are the only two reasons, by the way, why a team needs to run as we move into the second decade of the 21st century — keep the receivers legs fresh and run out the fourth-quarter clock with a lead.
Blame the insignificance of a running attack on all these freak athletes on defense. Nose tackles like Jamal Williams are 350 pounds, strong as a bull and quick as a cat. Linebackers like D.J. Williams are 240 pounds, strong enough to mash the run and fast enough to cover Chris Johnson on pass patterns out of the backfield. Safeties like Brian Dawkins can cover a tight end, but more importantly load up like a linebacker to stop the run and blitz the quarterback.
The only way to avoid those physical specimens is to spread them out and throw the ball to where skill players have space. Granted, 8 yards on 17 carries from the backs is unacceptable. The Broncos have to do better than that.
But the reason the running game has to get better is so it can help their play-action passing game.
And they will improve. The Broncos will get better because their line will better. Their inexperienced
Kyle Orton may have been running for his life against the Titans on Sunday. But he led the Broncos in rushing yards. More photos. (Joe Amon, The Denver Post)
blockers (J.D. Walton, Stanley Daniels) will improve with each additional game of experience and their banged-up veterans (Ryan Clady, Chris Kuper, Ryan Harris) will improve as they get healthier.
There's a chance the Broncos could start becoming at least an adequate running team after their bye week in early November. Just in time for winter.
Hi, Mike. You mentioned the Broncos were discussing a long-term contract with Champ Bailey in your Sept. 10 article. Any news on that? He will make an excellent safety when he can't do solo corner work anymore as he is good at coverage and he is a tackling machine. -- Dave C., Irvine, Calif.
I don't think it's any coincidence contract talks resumed last week. The Sept. 10 article, which was written on Sept. 9, talked about how the Broncos and Bailey's agent, Jack Reale, were engaged in serious negotiations. Broncos general manager Brian Xanders acknowledged they were in discussions.
They were working off a four-year extension that would keep Bailey here through 2014. A proposal was submitted on Sept. 10 — but then the regular season opened Sept. 12 and the Broncos got busy with other things. Sadly, Kenny McKinley's death put several business matters on hold for a week.
But I don't think it's any coincidence that contract talk resumed a few days after the Indy game, after Bailey proved once again he is the Broncos' best and most valuable player. Seven days after walking out of Invesco Field at Mile High on crutches with a right heel injury, Bailey was out there shutting down Reggie Wayne. Did you see Wayne's numbers this week against Jacksonville? (15 catches for 196 yards, in case you didn't).
When is McDaniels going to start managing the game better? He called a timeout before the end of the half to kick a field goal and allowed plenty of time for Tennessee to kick a field goal before the half. Then in the second half he passed up a field goal that would have put him down by one with six minutes left only to fail on fourth down again. The defense was playing well and the coach almost cost them the game again. He should have learned after the Colts game. Is he ever going to learn?
-- Travis Harrison, United Arab Emirates
McDaniels admitted he goofed by calling a timeout with 23 seconds remaining in the half. I think because he went for it on fourth-and-3 in the red zone and failed in losses to Jacksonville and Indianapolis, he wanted time to think about whether to go for it on fourth-and-2 from the 18 against Tennessee.
He shouldn't have, and it did backfire as the Titans got in position for Rob Bironas' 55-yard field goal. But when a coach admits he made a mistake, it's easier to give him the benefit of the doubt. Coaches make hundreds of decisions on game day.
Going for it on fourth down is just the decision that gets scrutinized. Not that this is unfair. It's why head coaches make the really big bucks.
As for going for it on fourth-and-3 from the Tennessee 4 with 4:39 remaining and down 20-16 — I agreed with that decision.
I agreed this time and disagreed the previous week against Indianapolis when it was fourth-and-3 at the 12 with 8:49 remaining and the Colts leading 20-13. I thought the 4 provided better odds than the 12 and the time — 4 less minutes — made the situation a little more desperate.
The difference between winning and losing, as it turned out, was the defense. When fourth down didn't work out last week, Peyton Manning converted on third-and-15. The Titans got one first down from Chris Johnson but remained conservative and Vince Young couldn't convert a third-and-11.
Hi, Mike. I like the direction this team is going. Do you?
-- G. Restauri, Hamilton, Ontario
I believe the worst is behind the Broncos. That 3-10 skid dating back to last season will be looked back upon as "the dark days" of the McDaniels' era. I believe better days are ahead for the Broncos — regardless of what happens this Sunday at Baltimore.
There is something about beating a fierce, rugged opponent like Tennessee on the road that makes you think the Broncos are about to trend upward in their transition phase.
I know. I know. The Broncos can't run the ball. Their offensive line remains in a state of flux. And their kick coverage units have been poor. No doubt, the Broncos are a flawed team.
But look around the NFL, G. Name a team that isn't flawed. Pittsburgh might be the most complete team now that Ben Roethlisberger is back. But Peyton Manning's team can't play defense or run the ball. Drew Brees' team has kicker problems and suddenly the offense isn't nearly as explosive. Kansas City is about to hit the meat of its schedule.
Every team has problems. I think the Broncos have a chance for a successful season because their strengths are defense and passing the ball. And I think it's better to be terrible at running the ball than terrible at passing it.
During the Titans game, we kicked a field goal and made it. A flag was thrown (offsides/neutral zone infraction against defense), we accepted the penalty and rekicked (making it a second time). That doesn't make sense to me. Why did we accept it? Why wasn't it marked off on the ensuing kickoff?
-- Leon, Texas
It was a dead-ball infraction. No play. The officials were a tad tardy in blowing the play dead. The whistle should have blown before Lonie Paxton's long snap. It's not like McDaniels accepted the penalty because he wanted to see if Prater could make it from 35 yards out as well as 40. Then again, Prater has been automatic this year (8-for-8 in field goals). I also think that because he had to make it again, it was Prater's most impressive field goal of the young season.
How much time during the week do the Broncos spend practicing their special teams coverage? How can they be this bad? What can they do to fix it? -- Tim, Wyoming
I've got a theory. I think the fact the Broncos practice and play their home games in altitude hurts their special teams when they're on the road.
Now, hold on. Watch your language, mailbaggers, and hear me out. I think because Prater boots most of his kickoffs for touchbacks at home, it negatively effects the coverage on the road when he only occasionally reaches the end zone.
One, there's the fatigue factor. The kickoff team might only have to cover one or two kicks at home but five or six on the road. The more a guy sprints, the more speed he loses with each kickoff.
Two, the more times a kickoff coverage is employed, the more likely somebody is going to make a mistake.
And three, Prater's touchbacks at home may subconsciously lull the coverage guys into a false sense of security on the road.
It's the old can't-pitch-at-home, can't-hit-on-the-road issue the Rockies went through before and after the humidor.
Hey, Mike! About Peyton Hillis... when will Tebow... in the red zone... Ah, forget that stuff. Do you think John Elway will continue to get more involved with the Broncos to the point he will actually be making a few decisions for the team, maybe in a "part ownership" capacity? Or in any other way? It sure couldn't hurt, right?
-- Darrin Cothran, Spartanburg, S.C.
Darrin, your writing style shows promise. (There's something familiar about it.) The more I poke around this issue, the more I believe Pat Bowlen isn't selling nothing to nobody, as they say. As he's inferred many times before, Bowlen is going to own the Broncos until the day they put him in a pine box. May we be many years away from finding out what happens next.
Hi, Mike. I heard something on local sports radio that sounded like Denver is looking to deal Tim Tebow. Is that true? And if so, why?
-- Lana, Jacksonville, Fla.
I'm sure you either misheard your local radio yakker, or you needed a television to see the tongue planted firmly in yakker's cheek. Tebow isn't going anywhere unless Kyle Orton sprains an ankle. At that point, Tebow will exchange the ballcap and clipboard for a helmet and the huddle.
Mike, WHY don't the Broncos ever pull out the Orange Crush-era throwbacks? Not to mention, the CLASSIC blue helmet with the "D" on the side with the horse in the middle!
-- Chad Greenland, Denver
By throwback, you mean all the way back to 1996? Because while that bright-orange look is, as you suggest Chad, identified with the Orange Crush Broncos of the 1970s, John Elway wore the uniform most of his career.
It wasn't until 1997 that the Broncos went to the darker-blue, wide-stripe uniform scheme they wear now.
Chad, your proposal would be like hearing Nirvana and 2Pac songs on an oldies station. Let's not rush time. Let's put a few more years distance between now and 1996 before the Broncos get nostalgic for bright orange.