PDA

View Full Version : Zane Beadles, your new starting right tackle



dogfish
10-19-2010, 06:29 PM
Posted October 18, 2010, 3:31 pm

Beadles to keep Broncos right tackle spot for now
By Lindsay Jones

Of the 45 players who were active and in uniform for the Broncos on Sunday, there was only one who didn’t step on the field.

That was right tackle Ryan Harris, a 16-game starter in 2008 and starter in 2009 until a broken toe ended his season in early November.

Harris missed the first three games of this season with an ankle injury, but returned to the starting lineup two weeks ago at Tennessee. But after a rough day in Baltimore last week, coaches opted to give Beadles another shot at right tackle. (Beadles started the games when Harris was out).

On Monday morning, coach Josh McDaniels said Beadles played well enough Sunday against the New York Jets to remain the starter. Though McDaniels said the spot remains “competitive,” this is bad news for Harris, who is in the final year of his contract in Denver.

“I thought [Beadles] played tough in there, did a decent job in pass protection against a team that really gives you a lot of different looks and brings different types of pressure,” McDaniels said.

McDaniels said Harris’ demotion was the result of “a combination of a lot of things,” including the ankle injury he suffered in the preseason finale at Minnesota. Because of the two injuries, Harris made only one start from Nov. 1, 2009 until two weeks ago.

Beadles, though, is projected long-term in the NFL at guard, and McDaniels late last week even referred to Beadles — a second-round pick from Utah — as a “jack of all trades, master of none.” So it remains unclear what the team’s long-term plans are at right tackle. Certainly McDaniels is leaving the door open for Harris to earn back his starting job. However, his reps will certainly decrease in practice.

“They compete in practice hard,” McDaniels said. “If it makes them both better, that’s a great thing for our team.”

http://blogs.denverpost.com/broncos/2010/10/18/beadles-to-keep-broncos-right-tackle-spot-for-now/5584/

_____________________

saw this coming, and i think it's the right move. . . harris is a goner at the end of the year-- i just hope he still has some value, but i'm sure we won't get much for a guy who got benched. . . i'm sure shanahan would give up a late pick for him. . .

claymore
10-19-2010, 06:31 PM
Im sure he will be a success wherever he goes next year.

dogfish
10-19-2010, 06:34 PM
Im sure he will be a success wherever he goes next year.

for six games. . .

claymore
10-19-2010, 07:28 PM
for six games. . .

6-7, Whatever it takes.

OldschoolFreak
10-19-2010, 09:28 PM
I don't get it. Harris literally had an All-Pro type performance in 2008. What happened to him?
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Lonestar
10-19-2010, 09:36 PM
for six games. . .

So far in DEN he has bee eligible for 53 games in his career but injuries or poor playing (not sure about last week) have kept him out of 27 games.

He has only only started in 26 of those games

http://www.nfl.com/players/ryanharris/careerstats?id=HAR534109

"Sorry Charlie but Sunquist only wants quality tuna."

I also believe he is a goner.

Lonestar
10-19-2010, 09:39 PM
I don't get it. Harris literally had an All-Pro type performance in 2008. What happened to him?
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Injuries and maybe style of the scheme who the hell knows.

dogfish
10-19-2010, 09:48 PM
yea, i would guess that he's still hurting. . .

topscribe
10-19-2010, 10:07 PM
yea, i would guess that he's still hurting. . .

Definite possibility. A tackle relies on footwork, and if that knee is still bothering
him, that could be raising havoc on his footwork . . .

-----

Stargazer
10-19-2010, 10:38 PM
Ryan Harris is done in Denver. I wonder if he will hook up with Wash/Houston next year?

silkamilkamonico
10-19-2010, 11:07 PM
IMHO we need to hit the oline HARD this offseason. At this point in light of specualtion, we have a future LT, a future C, no LG, a questionable RG, and a "role player" who projects longterm at G playing RT, and very little depth. Not good at all.

I love Champ, but I would trade him for that Patriots guy in a heartbeat.

Very very disappointed in the state of our oline right now, especially when it was arguably one of the best in the NFL just 2 seasons ago.

Bill Devaroe
10-20-2010, 06:24 AM
I love this move - Harris is a bum. Maybe try Richard Quinn in this role on max protect stuff? I think he is going to be a gamer.

SOCALORADO.
10-20-2010, 07:47 AM
IMHO we need to hit the oline HARD this offseason. At this point in light of specualtion, we have a future LT, a future C, no LG, a questionable RG, and a "role player" who projects longterm at G playing RT, and very little depth. Not good at all.

I love Champ, but I would trade him for that Patriots guy in a heartbeat.

Very very disappointed in the state of our oline right now, especially when it was arguably one of the best in the NFL just 2 seasons ago.

Hate to say it, but i sorta agree.
Does anyone really think Champ wins a SB in DEN?
I want to, really i do, but really!?! REALLY!?!?
He could go to NE, and have a real chance in the
next 2 seasons to get to the big show before he
retires.
And DEN gets a Pro Bowl, road grater at Guard.

As for Beadles, i think he will be just fine. Give him some
time to finally adjust to one spot, and i think he thrives in
DEN.

PAINTERDAVE
10-20-2010, 10:44 AM
Beadles got his feet wet...
made some rookie mistakes...
watched from the sideline...
hopefully absorbed and learned a bunch...

now he gets to try it all out again.

I like his chances...

underrated29
10-20-2010, 11:00 AM
I really like harris too.


I'm pulling for him to send the beadle back to LG.

jhildebrand
10-20-2010, 11:27 AM
The magnitude of that 4th preseason game was epic and totally justifies playing Harris.

Gimpygod
10-20-2010, 11:30 AM
I don't get it. Harris literally had an All-Pro type performance in 2008. What happened to him?
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

the answer to this one is pretty simple, the difference between good coaching and great coaching is what we are seeing here. A good coach determines a players weaknesses and strengths and then tries to put that player in situations, through schemes and playcalling, where their strengths are maximized and weaknesses are minimized. The good coach will also try to work on the weakness and maybe even eliminate it entirely… Schmucks!

As many here have pointed out, McDaniels, isn't a good coach he is a great coach! He goes out and finds a player' s weakness, highlights it and then features that weakness week in and week out. Heck, he might even make up a weakness that isn't there (character) and then beat that imaginary weakness into the ground after which he will cite these weaknesses as grounds for trade or dismissal. Man he is good! ERR… I mean great! Other teams will then pick up these abysmal discards and make them look artificially good by playing them in position and putting them in "good" situations… Absolutely pathetic. McDaniels has taken this philosophy outside of the realm of football as well which you can see in his charity: take an albino to the tanning salon foundation. TATTS for short

dogfish
10-20-2010, 11:33 AM
the answer to this one is pretty simple, the difference between good coaching and great coaching is what we are seeing here. A good coach determines a players weaknesses and strengths and then tries to put that player in situations, through schemes and playcalling, where their strengths are maximized and weaknesses are minimized. The good coach will also try to work on the weakness and maybe even eliminate it entirely… Schmucks!

As many here have pointed out, McDaniels, isn't a good coach he is a great coach! He goes out and finds a player' s weakness, highlights it and then features that weakness week in and week out. Heck, he might even make up a weakness that isn't there (character) and then beat that imaginary weakness into the ground after which he will cite these weaknesses as grounds for trade or dismissal. Man he is good! ERR… I mean great! Other teams will then pick up these abysmal discards and make them look artificially good by playing them in position and putting them in "good" situations… Absolutely pathetic. McDaniels has taken this philosophy outside of the realm of football as well which you can see in his charity: take an albino to the tanning salon foundation. TATTS for short

wow, man. . .


all that bitter is NOT good for you!

:lol:

Gimpygod
10-20-2010, 11:41 AM
wow, man. . .


all that bitter is NOT good for you!

:lol:

what I really like about the post is its bitter, funny, and incredibly accurate. The trifecta!

I invented the charity of course because Josh probably wouldn't be involved in actual charity… Unless it involved washing Bill Belichick's jock or something… And by washing I mean sniffing.

I Eat Staples
10-20-2010, 12:07 PM
Harris is a good player. Beadles may be a good player someday, who knows. He's not better than Harris now. Hochstein and Daniels are terrible players. Start Beadles instead of one of them.

broncofaninfla
10-20-2010, 12:31 PM
I'm guessing injuries play a huge role in this decision. I hate to see him go but I think he is a goner as well. He'll land a big money contract somewhere and like a lot of the good players who aren't with Denver anymore, will have a succesfull career, especially if he ends up in a zone blocking scheme.

Lonestar
10-20-2010, 12:45 PM
the answer to this one is pretty simple, the difference between good coaching and great coaching is what we are seeing here. A good coach determines a players weaknesses and strengths and then tries to put that player in situations, through schemes and playcalling, where their strengths are maximized and weaknesses are minimized. The good coach will also try to work on the weakness and maybe even eliminate it entirely… Schmucks!

As many here have pointed out, McDaniels, isn't a good coach he is a great coach! He goes out and finds a player' s weakness, highlights it and then features that weakness week in and week out. Heck, he might even make up a weakness that isn't there (character) and then beat that imaginary weakness into the ground after which he will cite these weaknesses as grounds for trade or dismissal. Man he is good! ERR… I mean great! Other teams will then pick up these abysmal discards and make them look artificially good by playing them in position and putting them in "good" situations… Absolutely pathetic. McDaniels has taken this philosophy outside of the realm of football as well which you can see in his charity: take an albino to the tanning salon foundation. TATTS for short

Bitter that mike was fired. Time to move on.
The team is going a completely different direction.

Moving from a ZBS running game where you get help from one or more other linemen each time.

To real football where most of the time you have to block one on one.

Noy even factoring in the guy has missed more than half of the games we have played since being drafting him 4 years ago.

If the guy can't man up he should not expect to play.
Last team to be a winner playing straight ZBS was the Broncos A decade ago. When we had HOF players on offense.

Do you understand why we moved away from it.

Time to move on.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Gimpygod
10-20-2010, 03:04 PM
Bitter that mike was fired. Time to move on.
The team is going a completely different direction.

Moving from a ZBS running game where you get help from one or more other linemen each time.

To real football where most of the time you have to block one on one.

Noy even factoring in the guy has missed more than half of the games we have played since being drafting him 4 years ago.

If the guy can't man up he should not expect to play.
Last team to be a winner playing straight ZBS was the Broncos A decade ago. When we had HOF players on offense.

Do you understand why we moved away from it.

Time to move on.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

I understand many things, for instance the regime change had nothing to do with blocking scheme and everything to do with Shanahan refusing to fire Bob Slowik. I also understand that you and many others believed we needed to change blocking schemes because of our ineffectiveness in the red zone and inability to "blow people off the line of scrimmage." (Please refute this if necessary but I have read hundreds of your posts suggesting the same.) So the question becomes do you understand that Ryan Harris and all of the other excellent offensive lineman from the 2008 squad have not suddenly became ineffectual by their own doing, they have been made to look untalented by this scheme McDaniels has implemented. Let's look at some numbers:

2010
rushing yards per game 67.3
red zone proficiency ranking 27th in the league

2008
rushing yards per game 116.4
red zone proficiency ranking 16th in the league (an important side note here is that we went through seven different starting running backs six of whom are no longer in the NFL and one who was selling cell phones halfway through the season)

By the standards given above we are regressing by your very own standards we are regressing and yet you refuse to call McDaniels out on his ineffectual scheming. Harris and Clady were all-pro tackles and suddenly they become terrible players (even last year prior to any injury), why? Because they are no longer being put into the best position to exhibit their abilities. Harris as well as many other players are being trimmed from the roster because McDaniels is inept, not due to their own inherent abilities or potential productivity. Are you able to at least see that we are becoming worse rather than better?

Lonestar
10-20-2010, 04:08 PM
I understand many things, for instance the regime change had nothing to do with blocking scheme and everything to do with Shanahan refusing to fire Bob Slowik. I also understand that you and many others believed we needed to change blocking schemes because of our ineffectiveness in the red zone and inability to "blow people off the line of scrimmage." (Please refute this if necessary but I have read hundreds of your posts suggesting the same.) So the question becomes do you understand that Ryan Harris and all of the other excellent offensive lineman from the 2008 squad have not suddenly became ineffectual by their own doing, they have been made to look untalented by this scheme McDaniels has implemented. Let's look at some numbers:

2010
rushing yards per game 67.3
red zone proficiency ranking 27th in the league

2008
rushing yards per game 116.4
red zone proficiency ranking 16th in the league (an important side note here is that we went through seven different starting running backs six of whom are no longer in the NFL and one who was selling cell phones halfway through the season)

By the standards given above we are regressing by your very own standards we are regressing and yet you refuse to call McDaniels out on his ineffectual scheming. Harris and Clady were all-pro tackles and suddenly they become terrible players (even last year prior to any injury), why? Because they are no longer being put into the best position to exhibit their abilities. Harris as well as many other players are being trimmed from the roster because McDaniels is inept, not due to their own inherent abilities or potential productivity. Are you able to at least see that we are becoming worse rather than better?

NO never would say that I have not been a proponent of getting effective OL guys since forever when it was apparent to everyone that was logical and saw that ZBS does not work inside the 10 yard line unless you have a few HOF players on your squad .

Which with mike going cheap on the oline till he drafted Clady continually deteriorated till we got to the point of where we are today.

In order to move the pile inside the red zone and in particular inside the 5 you have to have BEEF. 285 pound OL guys do not make it in the nfl in the running game.

that said when mike was fired Pat decided to go another direction and hired a guy that would radically change the face of our team.

When he was interviewed there is no doubt in my mind Josh sold Pat and Joe of going large and scrapping the ZBS as we KNEW it. HE sold them on the idea of PBS as a backup to the spread offense. There in no doubt in my mind about that.

SO scrapping the ZBS as we know it and moving to the PBS the mistake he made was thinking that Dennison could teach our light in the ass OL guys how to do so considering our prowess in offense the year before, there was no way he could come in and replace Dennison and the OL on top of what else happened.

Remember that Rick was LB in college and in the pros a a smart kid that was taught the ZBS from a zen master of of it in Gibbs. but he did not know anything but ZBS never playing the position could not make that change over. Apparently there was either enough faith in him to do so by Pat and Joe that Josh did not have the horse power to replace him the first year. When it became apparent that RIck did not know his ass from a tea kettle about PBS he had to go.

Have we matched our past years stats NO not even close.

But then in 08 all 5 OL guys played every game and for the most part every snap.

Big difference from this year or for that matter last year.

This year harris the starting ORT has played in one game due to injuries.

we have a rookie Center toughest place to learn as a rookie.

Kuper started 5 games so far after ankle IIRC surgery.

Clady 6 games but no training camp and only 1 preseason game. after coming off Knee surgrey in april that normally take a year to heal.

Revolving door at OLG with almost everyone starting there this fall.

So far Beadles has played at every spot on the OL this year but center.

How can any logical mind think that with so much inconsistency in personnel that they can remotely be graded against past years.

Even those that are in there normal spots are not playing at 100% BOTH of them.

I know that you expected Josh to come in and leave the O alone but that was not what he was hired to do. Pat wanted the NE model and that is what we are building to. Like it or not.

Rebuilding a team that lost 32 players in the past two years that are no longer playing in the NFL 60% of 08 players are gone and good riddance because we sucked.

Hell 8 of the 11 starters on Defense are not playing consistently in the nfl.

Just not sure what you are expecting with such a turn over.

I suspect next year there may be one maybe two more ONE guys gone. Because they are not getting it done.

Ravage!!!
10-20-2010, 04:20 PM
We used the ZBS last game, and the game before. We are "moving away" from the ZBS by continuing to use it.

Ravage!!!
10-20-2010, 04:22 PM
McDaniels has taken this philosophy outside of the realm of football as well which you can see in his charity: take an albino to the tanning salon foundation. TATTS for short

Great post.. but I think if I were in charge, I would change the foundation's name to Take It To Tanning Salon :D