PDA

View Full Version : Simple suggestion to the defense



haroldthebarrel
09-29-2008, 09:42 AM
I wish we would have put in Niko Kotuvides at MLB. Or Larsen. Webster doesnt cut it, especially since he makes so many mental mistakes for a veteran player.
When I watch the game, the number of mental mistakes are just staggering.
All of our lbs make mental mistakes. DJ does as well, but he is getting better, and he can also cover up for it with athleticism. The safety play is horrible, and there is no doubt in my mind that Lynch would have strengthened it through his leadership skills as well as he would not make the same amount of mistakes. He will get outplayed yes, but not outwitted.'
We also seem to have no confidence in our fellow defenders. You see many times a player is out of position because he covers for another, sometimes you even freaking see a player out of position because he expects his fellow player to be out of position. What the hell is that !! How can you create teammate camaraderie when people expect each other to fail??

When organizations are in crisis mode and they bring in an expert to remedy it, the solution almost always is to make it simpler.
That's where I would start. Make it simpler, and have mental mistakes at a minimum. When you get better at that then you can complicate schemes.

If we play a simple defense, we may also use the young players more since the play book at game day isn't staggering. I wouldn't mind putting Barrett or Larsen in at game day as well. If your veterans let up almost 200 yards rushing to LJ, 33 points to the lowly Chiefs,don't get any turnovers, and make mental mistakes what is there to loose?

Remember, all we need is a defense that is 10-15 and we could probably get by with a 15-20 top defense.

Shazam!
09-29-2008, 09:44 AM
Webster reminds me of Chukwarrah.

NightTrainLayne
09-29-2008, 10:00 AM
When organizations are in crisis mode and they bring in an expert to remedy it, the solution almost always is to make it simpler.
That's where I would start. Make it simpler, and have mental mistakes at a minimum. When you get better at that then you can complicate schemes.


Supposedly this is what Slowik was doing already.

However, as I mentioned in the off-season several times, Slowik has been here through the past two DC's and supposedly supplanted Bates after the bye last year.

:confused:

How much change can we really expect out of an "in-house" guy like Slowik?

jrelway
09-29-2008, 10:01 AM
can we stop talkin about john lynch. he chose not to take the smaller role on this team, and he split. praised the patriots and he split. he wouldve done no better.

haroldthebarrel
09-29-2008, 10:14 AM
Supposedly this is what Slowik was doing already.

However, as I mentioned in the off-season several times, Slowik has been here through the past two DC's and supposedly supplanted Bates after the bye last year.

:confused:

How much change can we really expect out of an "in-house" guy like Slowik?

heck no.... we play the zero blitz sometimes. We had a few blitzes vs the Chiefs where there were two or more players in an angle towards the qb and they all took the same angle and overplayed as he stepped up.
When we blitz we are too impatient, I counted at least three times where we showed blitz too early and the qb knew he had a one on one with Gonzales or Bowe.

We are not playing simpler. Slowik is in my opinion panicking and trying to create new wrinkles but it often ends up with mental mistakes.

In my dream we would get Washburn, the defensive line coach for Titans at coordinator next year. this year though, we have to focus on the few things we can improve on already, and talent isn't one of them unless you want to give the youngsters a shot.
And finally, we really lost it when we fired Coyer. Turned out it was a lack of talent. That is fixable, but if we change coordinators every other year, we will find that some players who were good in one system doesn't fit in another.
And we have had that problem for years.

hamrob
09-29-2008, 10:14 AM
I agree...Larsen should get some snaps at MLB. He's not a FB...what a bunch of crap that whole charade is! I'd also like to see Barrett playing as well. Yeah, he'll get beat here and there...but he needs to learn and he's more atheletic then what we have on the field right now. Let the rookies play...it can't be much worse on D.

Having said that...the offense and their 4 turnovers lost this game.

MileHighWrath
09-29-2008, 10:15 AM
can we stop talkin about john lynch. he chose not to take the smaller role on this team, and he split. praised the patriots and he split. he wouldve done no better.

Why must some people hang onto these old players whose time has come and gone. There's a reason Lynch is not on this team ... it's the same reason he's not on ANY team. HE IS DONE.

Let it go people, let it go.

hamrob
09-29-2008, 10:17 AM
One other note on defense. Doom and Moss both speed rush to the outside every flippin down. It's like they have no other move. The Offense understands that and so, they are taken out of every play...every play!

For all you Doom lovers out there. He sucks!

DenBronx
09-29-2008, 10:35 AM
larsen hits like a ton of bricks. i think this guy would be a romo clone. why not give him a chance???

jrelway
09-29-2008, 10:41 AM
play barrett, play larsen, play all the young guys on this team to see what they can do during gameday. we have absolutly nothing to lose. LJ slumps against every other team they play exept for us. i bet earnest graham is lickin his chops. its gonna suck to watch sportscenter and nfl network all week cause this crap. but hey, they deserve it. i hope our D gets grilled hard.

56crash
09-29-2008, 10:50 AM
:elefant::elefant::elefant: lol

turftoad
09-29-2008, 10:54 AM
We don't have the personel to make things happen. Bottom line.

LRtagger
09-29-2008, 10:58 AM
The 4-3 / 3-4 hybrid is about the dumbest thing I have ever seen. When your players are too dumb to run the basic 4-3, you dont add in an entirely new defensive philosophy. Our players have no clue what they are doing and who they are covering when we are running the 3-4.

We need to watch some film from the Coyer days and go back to that D scheme. Not dominant by any means, but simple and somewhat effective. If we had Coyer's D now we would be right up there with Tenn as the top AFC team this year.

jrelway
09-29-2008, 11:01 AM
we switch to 3-4, teams run it down our throats. we switch back to the 4-3, they pass on us. its a lesser of 2 evils for us.

Requiem / The Dagda
09-29-2008, 11:06 AM
Harold, this is a great thread -- and I'm glad you started it.

The only thing I can say in regards to a defense is that it is time to find a man with a real solid philosophy on it and go from there. Posters like Dog, G and the like have discussed ad nauseum how this team hasn't had a real identity to build around on defense. We continue to run multiple scheme variations from 4-3 base defense and mix in the 3-4 here and there with its off-shoots (3-3-5, etc. -- anyone who watched yesterday's game probably correlated this to West Virginia's and Maryland's college defenses) and in my mind it is confusing our defense a great deal.

As seen from the first several games, we don't have the proper personnel to run a 4-3 to even "average" end results, so why would we try and run 3-4 variations when it is clear as day that we don't have HALF of the people necessary to make it run like a well-oiled machine. It just really baffles me.

Denver has attempted to get some players in on their defensive line and elsewhere over the past few drafts, but it seems that those effort were to no avail or are still works in progress. My beef is that we continuously change schemes and do not adhere to one strict philosophy (obviously there is room for change, as there are in all defenses) and run with it. The best defenses in the NFL -- Tampa Bay, Baltimore, etc. draft players that fit in with the ideology they want to go ahead with, rather than changing up their scheme to fit the players they have.

That is one of the biggest reasons this team is 3-1 today; and was on the verge of being worse than advertised. This defense is horrendous, and until someone in Dove Valley finally realizes that you need a defensive scheme (not 24 of them) and that it is necessary to draft and acquire players who fit and buy into such system in order to be successful, we're in for a world of hurt the rest of the season.

I still think we're a playoff bound team, but there is no way in Hell we make it to the Promise Land with a defense like this. Last game was an aberration for the offense, IMO -- but that will happen a few more times this year. You can't constantly rely on an offense to put up 35+ a game in order to win. That's too much pressure. Which is very unfortunate. Because if we even had half a defense, I think we'd have a good shot at the Lombardi.

haroldthebarrel
09-29-2008, 11:09 AM
What is constant is that our defense sucks no matter what wrinkles Slowik wants to put in.

I say go back to basic and let the young guys play. Play solid, let them get their drives and capitalize on turnovers. Other teams make mental mistakes too, just we are currently on a different universe.

This I mean, we weren't and aren't a true contender with that defense. Might as well play the young guys because you know at the very least they will improve.

KISS- keep it simple stupid!

SR
09-29-2008, 11:11 AM
We need to quit picking up scrub players from other teams. Marcus Thomas and Kenny Peterson play well together. Robertson has been nowhere to be seen through the first four games. Bly gets lit up all game long. Our safeties are mediocre, but don't get the job done often enough (see: Bly and Champ chasing down LJ in the first quarter). Our linebackers are okay but DJ is the only one who is really worth a shit. Webster misses too many tackles and misreads too many plays (like Abdullah, and it got Abdullah cut...thankfully). All Webster is good for is getting people fired up, but when you don't lead by example you fail to lead. Niko is smart. He may not hit as hard or be as aggressive as Webster, but he's smarter and would miss fewer tackles. I would not be opposed to putting Larsen in there either. He had that one hit on special teams yesterday and completely clobbered that dude. We need

haroldthebarrel
09-29-2008, 11:31 AM
quick questions. Are there any players currently on our defense that we should cathegorize as a smart player? I think you might put Champ Bailey on that list but who else?

Both Woodward and Larsen seem to be either smart or instinctive. Kotuvides seems to be smart. Of course only Dj and Boss could play SAM so Boss is safe since DJ should never play anything but Will. Its too early to play WW I think.

We know TB is going to dink and dunk on us. And we know that their TB cover2 wont let that many big plays but many plays underneath. This is such a hell game..... Bah!
What we cannot afford to them are the big plays due to missed assignments or missed tackles. I dont think TB is a team many QBs can come back 10+ points so what do we do?

56crash
09-29-2008, 11:32 AM
Broncos’ McCree shaken up
Posted: September 28th, 2008 | NFL.com Staff | Tags: Denver Broncos, Marlon McCree

Broncos safety Marlon McCree left the game after being shaken up following a 17-yard run by Larry Johnson with 11:59 left in the quarter.

After being attended to by trainers, McCree left the field under his own power. He was replaced by Calvin Lowry.


so much for your guys saying lets play the young guys...

turftoad
09-29-2008, 11:42 AM
Broncos’ McCree shaken up
Posted: September 28th, 2008 | NFL.com Staff | Tags: Denver Broncos, Marlon McCree

Broncos safety Marlon McCree left the game after being shaken up following a 17-yard run by Larry Johnson with 11:59 left in the quarter.

After being attended to by trainers, McCree left the field under his own power. He was replaced by Calvin Lowry.


so much for your guys saying lets play the young guys...

Lowry is another cast off. He's only here for depth. Depth behind one of the worst saftey tandems in the league.
That's not saying much.

56crash
09-29-2008, 11:51 AM
Lowry is another cast off. He's only here for depth. Depth behind one of the worst saftey tandems in the league.
That's not saying much.

nope I think he is one of those good old boys here is the guy you need from a friend jeff fisher is best friends with coach so I doubt he would say get he guy if he were not good . thing is young guys only and we will not get better we need to take a few youg guys and work on being were players should be on plays not make huge chages.,

jrelway
09-29-2008, 12:01 PM
we can learn a little something from jeff fisher and his D.

NightTrainLayne
09-29-2008, 12:14 PM
nope I think he is one of those good old boys here is the guy you need from a friend jeff fisher is best friends with coach so I doubt he would say get he guy if he were not good . thing is young guys only and we will not get better we need to take a few youg guys and work on being were players should be on plays not make huge chages.,

You need to update your English translator program pronto.

haroldthebarrel
10-02-2008, 09:56 AM
To add on my thoughts I have thought more through how I would have attacked the calamity we are in. Remember I still want to focus on the simple things in the short run, but I also think in the long we need a commitment to defensive consistency.

1. We need consistency on defense. That means we should commit to a coordinator for longer periods even if that means a weaker defense in the short run.
Point being, with consistency at defense, just like on offense it will be easier to identify the second day players that will fit our system. I believe Mediator amongst others(the poster I quoted) believe in this.

2. If or when we get a new coordinator the emphasis should be on fundamentals more so than scheming. TB has a very complicated defense, but what really separated them in the past and future are the smartness and the fundamentals on the line. They can coach up their prospects.

3. Just like the new tackles on offense gave us a better line, it should not be underestimated how much this means for the skill players. A great line makes the skill players more effective. Look at KC in the past, Dallas, Philadelphia and others who are all great on both lines.
Thus we need to make a committed effort to the defensive line. This is were it starts. Past reports have shown that we were looking at T. Harris, J. Kearse, T. Suggs, Kris Jenkins and others but failed to make the commitment when that meant a trade up. I don't think we can afford that anymore.

4. Not contradicting point 3 but I believe we should trade up when there is a player within reach that is so much better than the projected at our spot.
That means. Take BPA if possible especially on defense. If we are slightly out of reach trade up, and most importantly do that if it is a lineman.

5. The good thing about the offense is that it appears we only lack a true star running back. This means we can focus our draft choices on defense.
But remember point 1, we need consistency in the staff otherwise we will find that players will not adapt to new systems. Which is a problem in many clubs as they change completely new philosophies.
Both the Jets and 49ers are prime examples of clubs letting very talented players go because they don't fit their new system. How good might the 49ers defense with Peterson, Carter and Willis amongst others in a 3-4?
A focus on drafting and not short fixes will be better. Especially with better coaching in the long run.
I would advice not to go after any free agents unless it is a superstar. Then at least consider the prize versus the overall worth. I am on the edge regarding a talent like Peppers myself.

6. Get rid of the defensive line coaches. They havent produced and just like David Gibbs especially Burnley should have been fired two years ago.
I really dislike that really none of the projects have failed to really hit it. And I am certain that had Moss and Thomas been drafted by for instance the Eagles or Giants they would have been miles better than what they have been taught here.

7. I have a proposition for a new coordinator. His name is Jim Washburn and coaches the defensive line for the Titans. Just like Fisher, he and the coordinator have been consistent. That is a big reason they are so good.
What's more, he have coached up Kearse, Haynesworth and the transformation Vandenbosch had from Arizona was simply amazing.
You really get the feeling that most if not all line prospects they train are as fundamentally sound and play as smart as their ceiling should be.
Washburn is not a young coach, but it seems like we stepped a few years back with Coyer. Perhaps it was only the talent he needed? At least to get a top 10-15 defense which in the short run should be our not unrealistic goal.

8. This means that we might not be true contenders for the next two years, which is a shame because if Denver gets to the SB this decennium we would have been to a superbowl in every ten years since the seventies.
A shame, but it might be better to be a contender for 5 plus years than short runs of 1-3 years every other year of a new defensive coordinator.

TheRecession
10-02-2008, 10:19 AM
Getting rid of Champ and Bly for picks is a start. If they cannot play bump and run then there no longer Elite corners.

haroldthebarrel
10-02-2008, 10:36 AM
Getting rid of Champ and Bly for picks is a start. If they cannot play bump and run then there no longer Elite corners.

There is absolutely no way I trade away a future hall of famer for picks.
I respect your opinion. but the chances of getting somebody to replace him or to get more picks that have to pan out just outweighs the gain from trading him.
Not to mention that Bailey is a leader, the best player and the one who doesnt give up the most. I also think that part of the reason both Marshall and Royal have become so good so quick is that they have to face Bailey and Bly and that can only make any prospect better.

TheRecession
10-02-2008, 10:40 AM
There is absolutely no way I trade away a future hall of famer for picks.
I respect your opinion. but the chances of getting somebody to replace him or to get more picks that have to pan out just outweighs the gain from trading him.
Not to mention that Bailey is a leader, the best player and the one who doesnt give up the most. I also think that part of the reason both Marshall and Royal have become so good so quick is that they have to face Bailey and Bly and that can only make any prospect better.

Royal and Marshall are already good though. I don't think there is a need to keep them around for that reason alone. I would rather draft a young corner who can play bump and run.

Quick question, Do you think Bailey and Bly have lost a step?

muse
10-02-2008, 11:46 AM
I'm not sure what to do about MLB...Webster has been getting a bit better the last few weeks, but it's obvious that he's not a long term solution even if he is currently the defensive emotional leader. He may not even be resigned this year.

Out of Greek the Player and Larsen, I like Larsen better as he is flat out ferocious. Unfortunately, both are not burners by any means which kind of spoils their chances at winning that spot.

I never usually agree with suggestions of moving players to different positions, but I think there's a possibility that Woodyard may be moved over. He'd need to gain a couple of pounds, but from what I hear he's smart enough to play there. So I'll be keeping an eye on him - it's obvious the coaching staff like him a lot (Shanny's mentioned him). Of course, I won't expect to see him any time soon as he is, after all, a rookie (and an undrafted one at that). But it's an interesting idea.

What worries me is that firstly, the scheme has been simplified, yet there are still guys out of position which also is exacerbated by the seeming lack of leadership. Secondly, apparently there's good chemistry in the locker room on D but bizarrely that does not show at all on the field. The only guys who seem to play as a unit are the LBs...but there isn't a whole lot of communication between the three levels as far as I can see. Apart from Champ chatting to Boss. There are times where the LBs have to get in their linemen's faces and such. I don't see that at all which is a far cry from 05 where we had guys like Al, Pryce, Lynch, DWill, Gold etc.

haroldthebarrel
10-02-2008, 01:00 PM
Royal and Marshall are already good though. I don't think there is a need to keep them around for that reason alone. I would rather draft a young corner who can play bump and run.

Quick question, Do you think Bailey and Bly have lost a step?

to an extent. But it gets emphasized through the lack of a pass rush.
With a normal pass rush, we wouldnt speak of them having to play bump and run. Partly because the rules never favors it, but the more important reason is that both are read and react players and are much better in zone or off coverage.

And finally, if we have one position filled with starter talent. Why the heck gamble on getting some corners that may or may not reach that talent?
That sounds like change for the sake of change.
You dont fill positions filled by veterans that are very good or even HOF talent. KC thought they could just develop ordinary free agents and late rounders to keep their line. Look what that did to them.

Keep the strength and use the draft to make the weaker positions better.
With the young offense set, we can afford to use our picks on defense anyway. Again, it seems like a waste to have to fill the corner spots again.
People forget how bad we were at corner until the genious trade for Bailey.

spikerman
10-02-2008, 03:29 PM
I have thought for a while that they should experiment with moving Bailey to FS. He is already the best tackler in the secondary (maybe on the entire defense) and his speed would really help negate the big play. The lack of a pass rush already eliminates him as a "shut down" corner, so why not give him the chance to use his athleticism to roam the field and make plays?

TheRecession
10-02-2008, 03:45 PM
I have thought for a while that they should experiment with moving Bailey to FS. He is already the best tackler in the secondary (maybe on the entire defense) and his speed would really help negate the big play. The lack of a pass rush already eliminates him as a "shut down" corner, so why not give him the chance to use his athleticism to roam the field and make plays?

Best post of this whole thread. Bailey should be moved to Safety atleast we would have the ball hawk were looking for from the safety position.

turftoad
10-02-2008, 03:51 PM
I have thought for a while that they should experiment with moving Bailey to FS. He is already the best tackler in the secondary (maybe on the entire defense) and his speed would really help negate the big play. The lack of a pass rush already eliminates him as a "shut down" corner, so why not give him the chance to use his athleticism to roam the field and make plays?

So you want to take the best CB in the game and switch him to a different position?? :confused:

spikerman
10-02-2008, 03:59 PM
So you want to take the best CB in the game and switch him to a different position?? :confused:
As I said in my original post - without a pass rush, what good does it do to have the best CB in the game? Take a look at the passing stats for the opposing teams. They're having NO problem taking this defense apart. Besides, as a safety he would have more of an overall impact on the field than as a CB without a pass rush.

turftoad
10-02-2008, 04:13 PM
As I said in my original post - without a pass rush, what good does it do to have the best CB in the game? Take a look at the passing stats for the opposing teams. They're having NO problem taking this defense apart. Besides, as a safety he would have more of an overall impact on the field than as a CB without a pass rush.

I agree with you that we need a saftey, bad.

However, Champ is not moving to saftey. We just need to live with it this year and address the position in the off season.

Moving Champ back there isn't going to help this year anyway, just creates another problem.

LRtagger
10-02-2008, 04:25 PM
As I said in my original post - without a pass rush, what good does it do to have the best CB in the game? Take a look at the passing stats for the opposing teams. They're having NO problem taking this defense apart. Besides, as a safety he would have more of an overall impact on the field than as a CB without a pass rush.


This makes sense, but it will never happen. I'm hoping Shanny tries to implement SOME type of defensive change during the bye week. I just hope our O can carry the load until then.

Ziggy
10-02-2008, 04:26 PM
Champ won't be moved to safety, but it's not a ridiculous idea. With no pass rush, other teams just remove Champ from the game by not throwing at him. Put him at safety, and he can roam the field and make plays in both the passing and running game. Won't happen though.

topscribe
10-02-2008, 04:40 PM
One other note on defense. Doom and Moss both speed rush to the outside every flippin down. It's like they have no other move. The Offense understands that and so, they are taken out of every play...every play!

For all you Doom lovers out there. He sucks!

That's why he got only 12½ sacks last year, right?

You have seen a limited number of moves from him because he has not had
the use of his hand, I'm sure. He didn't all the sudden become bad. I'm not
sure of Moss at this point, but I don't have the least of worries for Dumervil.

-----

OMorange&blue
10-02-2008, 05:05 PM
we can learn a little something from jeff fisher and his D.

Fischer drafted VY. Oops!

OMorange&blue
10-02-2008, 05:07 PM
Niko ******* sucks. Please don't mention his name again. Thanks.

spikerman
10-02-2008, 07:37 PM
Champ won't be moved to safety, but it's not a ridiculous idea. With no pass rush, other teams just remove Champ from the game by not throwing at him. Put him at safety, and he can roam the field and make plays in both the passing and running game. Won't happen though.
I agree with you on all points. Well put! :D

weazel
10-02-2008, 10:22 PM
this ship is sinking!

gobroncsnv
10-02-2008, 10:45 PM
Fischer drafted VY. Oops!

There's a LOT of folks out there that think the Titans took Young because of Bud Adams, not Jeff Fisher. The owner wins these battles with the coach EVERY time. Fish wanted Cutler, from what I've heard.

Bronco9798
10-02-2008, 11:18 PM
That's why he got only 12½ sacks last year, right?

You have seen a limited number of moves from him because he has not had
the use of his hand, I'm sure. He didn't all the sudden become bad. I'm not
sure of Moss at this point, but I don't have the least of worries for Dumervil.

-----

Doom stated his hand was no problem at all. I'm not buying that excuse. Watch the games again. He just has no good moves inside, or out really. He's disappointing to watch, as Moss is. Maybe he'll get better and do something, who knows. 2 tackles and 0 sacks through 4 games is no good. If you're hand is bothering than sit cause you're not helping the team with those god awful stats. Then again, who would you put there.

topscribe
10-02-2008, 11:54 PM
Doom stated his hand was no problem at all. I'm not buying that excuse. Watch the games again. He just has no good moves inside, or out really. He's disappointing to watch, as Moss is. Maybe he'll get better and do something, who knows. 2 tackles and 0 sacks through 4 games is no good. If you're hand is bothering than sit cause you're not helping the team with those god awful stats. Then again, who would you put there.

Wrong. Dumervil did say his hand was a problem. He said he couldn't grab
with it, and it was affecting his rushing ability. That was long before this last
game, or the two before it. So you don't have to buy. There's nothing to sell.

-----

DenverBronkHoes
10-03-2008, 12:37 AM
start larson

Bronco9798
10-03-2008, 08:18 AM
Wrong. Dumervil did say his hand was a problem. He said he couldn't grab
with it, and it was affecting his rushing ability. That was long before this last
game, or the two before it. So you don't have to buy. There's nothing to sell.

-----

The only thing effecting his ability is himself. He had the pins removed after week 3 I believe and had this comment for week 4.

Dumervil had a team-leading 12 1/2 sacks last season, but has none this year. He's hoping to change that when the Broncos play the Chiefs in Kansas City on Sunday.

He said, "I'm looking forward to having a nice weekend."

And he couldn't even beat a Chiefs lineman for anything. That's sad.

I'm not giving up on him, I just don't see him doing anything. If the hand was a problem then he shouldn't of been playing. He has provided nothing in 4 weeks. I don't see why a guy is playing if his hand is a problem and it does nothing to help the team. Anyway, just saying. I hope he has 5 sacks this Sunday and plays lights out. If one of these guys can't get to Griese, like Huard, both are immobile QB's than it's not going to change anytime soon. This needs to be the week that the DL starts playing football and making things happen. The strength of your defense should be upfront.

Broncolingus
10-03-2008, 08:53 AM
The strength of your defense should be upfront.

...this is a man with 'vision.'

Amen, brother!

haroldthebarrel
10-03-2008, 09:35 AM
The only thing effecting his ability is himself. He had the pins removed after week 3 I believe and had this comment for week 4.

Dumervil had a team-leading 12 1/2 sacks last season, but has none this year. He's hoping to change that when the Broncos play the Chiefs in Kansas City on Sunday.

He said, "I'm looking forward to having a nice weekend."

And he couldn't even beat a Chiefs lineman for anything. That's sad.

I'm not giving up on him, I just don't see him doing anything. If the hand was a problem then he shouldn't of been playing. He has provided nothing in 4 weeks. I don't see why a guy is playing if his hand is a problem and it does nothing to help the team. Anyway, just saying. I hope he has 5 sacks this Sunday and plays lights out. If one of these guys can't get to Griese, like Huard, both are immobile QB's than it's not going to change anytime soon. This needs to be the week that the DL starts playing football and making things happen. The strength of your defense should be upfront.


So true..... isnt it strange that we never seem to commit to the lines. We didnt really commit to the offensive line until the last two, three years.
Why do we always pick skill players on defense when teams like NE, Dallas, Philly, NYG and Jax(plus others) are consistently good, and they all have their strength in the front seven particularly the line. And all of them have two or more first rounders on their line as well, except I think maybe NYG who only have Kiwi.
It bugs me to no end.

LRtagger
10-03-2008, 12:03 PM
So true..... isnt it strange that we never seem to commit to the lines. We didnt really commit to the offensive line until the last two, three years.
Why do we always pick skill players on defense when teams like NE, Dallas, Philly, NYG and Jax(plus others) are consistently good, and they all have their strength in the front seven particularly the line. And all of them have two or more first rounders on their line as well, except I think maybe NYG who only have Kiwi.
It bugs me to no end.

They also have better coaching.

Moss and Crowder were both first day picks in 2007.

haroldthebarrel
10-03-2008, 02:07 PM
They also have better coaching.

Moss and Crowder were both first day picks in 2007.

And if you read the beginning of this thread and what else I have written that is exactly what I mean.... lol

LRtagger
10-03-2008, 02:11 PM
oops sorry, i was just responding to the part about us not addressing the DL in the draft :)

gobroncsnv
10-03-2008, 06:50 PM
So true..... isnt it strange that we never seem to commit to the lines. We didnt really commit to the offensive line until the last two, three years.

Well, the oline we had 2-3 years ago was not as large a concern as last year, but I think keeping Jay alive long enough to have a good defense was a smart move. You win games at the LOS, any of the best QB's know that. We'll have a good idea after this weekend how well we did on that score, the Bucs can bring it.

I have been hoping for better dline play for, really, about 10 years now. Once Smith, Williams left, Taanavasu became ordinary, Pryce's back got to him, and we didn't have Berry or Reagor long enough to keep anything going. It's well past time to go after the best we can get in order for us to be the best we can be. No more projects, get this done.

omac
10-05-2008, 06:05 AM
I watched the game against KC again to see what was happening with the defense. I noticed that on quite a few plays, including the big gain early on by LJ, the defense was able to get penetration into the backfield during rushing plays. The big one against LJ was Winborn getting through almost unblocked, save for a slight nudge to the side; Winbown wasn't able to adjust to LJ's cutback, and missed him completely.

In another one, Bly was able to get to the backfield from the right side and get a clean tackle on LJ, but though he wrapped up a leg, LJ was still able to push forward for about 4 or 5 more yards.

On another play, Jarvis Moss gets to the backfield from the right side unblocked, but he overcommits, going towards Huard, and is beaten badly when Huard just hands it off to Charles(?).

Quite a few of their critical passing plays went to Bowe, who repeatedly beat Jack Williams.

Overall, though, the defense played well for most of the game. Though Bly wasn't very good at bringing down anyone with his tackling, he was pretty good covering his receiver.

Boss seems to know where he needs to be to make the stops, but he takes risks and when he misses, the rushing gain is larger. As a whole, when the defense decides to attack, it either produces good stops, or it gives up big gains. The 3-4 look has produced some penetration in the backfield during rushing plays. They don't seem fully committed to their blitzes yet, though.

Rewatching the game, the defense didn't seem as bad as during the first time I watched it. Maybe with better tackling, we could be more dependable against the rush. Jack Williams admitted he made mistakes, playing way too conservatively; hopefully, he'll get better, because draft scouting wise, he seems to be an aggressive corner.

I didn't like Jarvis Moss' performance at all. He always seemed lost/late. I wouldn't mind if he was one of the game day inactives.

(added) Manuel seemed to be a pretty good safety valve against the run. He made some tackles that prevented longer runs.

Bronco9798
10-05-2008, 06:46 AM
Jarvis started the season being inactive and Shanny has given him a chance to do something, anything. I don't think it's working. He needs to do something quick. He isn't helping this defense at all. No#1 picks are suppose to be impact players. Just not happening with Moss.

gobroncsnv
10-05-2008, 07:53 AM
I didn't like Jarvis Moss' performance at all. He always seemed lost/late. I wouldn't mind if he was one of the game day inactives.


Gobroncsnv grants your wish... (when I was growing up I always wanted to be Zoltar.)



ok, Shanny grants your wish. Moss is out, per what Sirius reports.

BroncoJoe
10-05-2008, 10:11 AM
Meck's take with Kiszla from the Post:


In these hard times, when the Orange Crush has turned to mush, the "D" gets an "F" and scoring 30 points no longer guarantees victory for Denver, it's enough to make a depressed Broncomaniac wonder:

Can a nasty defender be made? Or must a man be born to tackle?

So I asked Karl Mecklenburg. You remember him. He caused Rocky Mountain Thunder by slamming quarterbacks so hard to the stadium turf that the Earth moved and bleachers shook at old Mile High.

When did Mecklenburg realize that creating football mayhem was his life?

At age 10, the son of a physician wanted to see if he had an appetite for a sport of violent collisions. All these years later, Mecklenburg laughs when he recalls one of the first father-son chats about the game

"Karl," his Pop asked, "what do you think about football?"

"Dad," replied the young Mecklenburg, "I really like to smash people."

That kid would grow up to be 6-feet-3, 240 pounds and play linebacker for the Broncos from 1983-94. He wore No. 77 and was fondly known as "Meck."

As in Wreck.

The problem with the current Denver defense, whether it's being toasted by New Orleans quarterback Drew Brees or getting squished under the cleats of Kansas City running back Larry Johnson, is pretty simple.

The Broncos don't appear to have anybody who really loves smashing people. Sure, linebacker D.J. Williams can go sideline to sideline in the blink of an eye, and cornerback Champ Bailey tackles as well as he covers the pass. But the heavy-impact defenders are gone from town.

Linebacker Al Wilson so loved throwing his body in harm's way that it cost him his health and forced the backbone of Denver's defense into premature retirement from the NFL.

While maybe it is true John Lynch could no longer run, when he walked away from the Broncos during training camp, there went a safety capable of making running backs wince at the mere thought of being hit by him.

Defensive lineman Trevor Pryce and his 80 career sacks now reside in Baltimore.

Wilson, Lynch and Pryce would mess people up.

And you wonder why Denver's defense is so messed up?

New defensive coordinator Bob Slowik can scribble all the defensive fronts, schemes and coverage packages he wants in a game plan. It's just so much doodling unless there's a tackler who jumps off the grease board and strikes fear in the hearts of foes.

"A physical defense can have a huge influence, if offensive players start tip-toeing, looking for where the next big hit is coming from," Mecklenburg said.

"I remember (Buffalo Bills running back) Thurman Thomas being asked, 'What team did you like to play the least?'

"And he said: 'The Broncos. That Dennis Smith. He's crazy.' "

Mecklenburg has a theory of why the big hits have quit coming for Denver. It's not that the players lack talent. But in the constant churn of change, the Broncos have lost their defensive identity.

From Ray Rhodes to Larry Coyer to Jim Bates to Slowik, the Broncos have fired, dismissed or parted ways with so many defensive coordinators there's smoke still rising from the fingers of blame pointed by Mike Shanahan.

You want a consistent pass rush? Well, it's difficult when from 2003-07 the team had a revolving door at right defensive end, a blur of personnel upheaval that shuffled through Bertrand Berry, Reggie Hayward, Pryce, Ebenezer Ekuban and Elvis Dumervil.

Since stepping in at left corner four years ago, Bailey has tutored at least 10 starters who have regularly manned the other three spots in Denver's secondary.
When the Orange Crush made a name for itself a generation ago, the coordinated madness of Randy Gradishar, Louis Wright and Barney Chavous was tattooed on the psyches of opponents.

In an NFL ruled by free agency, nothing stays the same. But, too often, this Broncos defense appears to be 11 strangers all looking for individual recognition.

"Everybody wants to make the ESPN hit," Mecklenburg said. "But big misses aren't a big help."

Get the picture? It's impossible to be a brick wall when a defense is never given time to jell.

That's messed up.

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_10639791

Den21vsBal19
10-05-2008, 10:39 AM
Meck's take with Kiszla from the Post:



http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_10639791
Gotta respect Snow Goose :salute:

omac
10-05-2008, 10:43 AM
Gobroncsnv grants your wish... (when I was growing up I always wanted to be Zoltar.)



ok, Shanny grants your wish. Moss is out, per what Sirius reports.

Hehehe, thanks man. Hopefully, someone more productive took his place. :cheers:

omac
10-05-2008, 10:47 AM
Great article, BroncoJoe! :cheers:

Tackling is fine, but the heavy hits is what an offensive player remembers and makes him hesitant. Our linebackers may be fast, but they need to get mean. So too should our safeties.

Broncolingus
10-05-2008, 10:53 AM
"Simple suggestion to the defense"

...rush the Quarterback!"

http://weblogs.newsday.com/sports/football/bob_blog/cowher.jpg

LRtagger
10-05-2008, 11:20 AM
Meck's take with Kiszla from the Post:



http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_10639791

Three words for that article

START

SPENCER

LARSON







PS: at MLB, not FB

omac
10-05-2008, 12:02 PM
Three words for that article

START

SPENCER

LARSON







PS: at MLB, not FB

How's he been playing at practice? They're gonna play him today, but at FB due to the death in Hillis' family.

LRtagger
10-05-2008, 12:10 PM
How's he been playing at practice? They're gonna play him today, but at FB due to the death in Hillis' family.

I dunno, but he cant be any worse than Webster :mad:

G_Money
10-05-2008, 12:33 PM
Big hitters on the team:

1) Larsen
2) DJ can be one when he wants to be
...

And only one of those guys is starting. Which is why in the draft I want hard-hitters at LB and S. Kiszla is rarely right, but I do agree that heavy hitters would help. But I'd take a defense that just knew what it was doing and could stop opposing offenses occasionally. Nobody knows what their responsibilities are out there.

Adding heavy hitters won't help if they're always out of position to make plays like the current guys are. Intimidation only works if the threat of violence is followed by actual violence.

This team is more likely to hurt each other than their opponents.

~G

broncofanatic1987
10-05-2008, 12:46 PM
Big hitters on the team:

1) Larsen
2) DJ can be one when he wants to be
...

And only one of those guys is starting. Which is why in the draft I want hard-hitters at LB and S. Kiszla is rarely right, but I do agree that heavy hitters would help. But I'd take a defense that just knew what it was doing and could stop opposing offenses occasionally. Nobody knows what their responsibilities are out there.
Adding heavy hitters won't help if they're always out of position to make plays like the current guys are. Intimidation only works if the threat of violence is followed by actual violence.

This team is more likely to hurt each other than their opponents.

~G

These seem to be the same excuses that were made last year. I thought getting rid of Bates and promoting Slowik was supposed to fix those problems.:confused:

Looks like it's going to be back to the drawing board next season. Who's the new defensive boss going to be?:rolleyes:

topscribe
10-05-2008, 12:47 PM
Big hitters on the team:

1) Larsen
2) DJ can be one when he wants to be
...

And only one of those guys is starting. Which is why in the draft I want hard-hitters at LB and S. Kiszla is rarely right, but I do agree that heavy hitters would help. But I'd take a defense that just knew what it was doing and could stop opposing offenses occasionally. Nobody knows what their responsibilities are out there.

Adding heavy hitters won't help if they're always out of position to make plays like the current guys are. Intimidation only works if the threat of violence is followed by actual violence.

This team is more likely to hurt each other than their opponents.

~G

Well, Webster can hit a ton. However, is it Webster to whom Meck might
have referred when he said that big misses don't do any good?

-----

Retired_Member_001
10-05-2008, 12:52 PM
My suggestion to our Defense? Get some turnovers. Seriously, we've only gotten 1 turnover this season and that was against the Raiders. We need to do better on that front.

omac
10-05-2008, 12:54 PM
Big hitters on the team:

1) Larsen
2) DJ can be one when he wants to be
...

And only one of those guys is starting. Which is why in the draft I want hard-hitters at LB and S. Kiszla is rarely right, but I do agree that heavy hitters would help. But I'd take a defense that just knew what it was doing and could stop opposing offenses occasionally. Nobody knows what their responsibilities are out there.

Adding heavy hitters won't help if they're always out of position to make plays like the current guys are. Intimidation only works if the threat of violence is followed by actual violence.

This team is more likely to hurt each other than their opponents.

~G

Well, if they're out of position for the ball, maybe they can hit the opponents anyway? You know, the old Detroit Pistons style defense ... the refs are bound to miss some of the fouls when they happen concurrently. :D

Retired_Member_001
10-05-2008, 12:56 PM
Well, if they're out of position for the ball, maybe they can hit the opponents anyway? You know, the old Detroit Pistons style defense ... the refs are bound to miss some of the fouls when they happen concurrently. :D

Bad Boys Defense.

:defense:

omac
10-05-2008, 01:05 PM
Bad Boys Defense.

:defense:

The last of the tough NBA defenses, dating back to the rough housing by the Celtics and Lakers. It changed after they won their 2nd Championship in a row, when the league decided to protect Michael Jordan and make physical defenses a thing of the past. :tsk:

The NBA hasn't been as good since.

Retired_Member_001
10-05-2008, 01:08 PM
The last of the tough NBA defenses, dating back to the rough housing by the Celtics and Lakers. It changed after they won their 2nd Championship in a row, when the league decided to protect Michael Jordan and make physical defenses a thing of the past. :tsk:

The NBA hasn't been as good since.

I hate superstar calls even when they are given to players of my own team (Kobe, Gasol and Vujacic most often).

Some of the most enjoyable NBA games I've watched have been when the refs keep things free flowing and don't interrupt with a call every 2-3 seconds. :lol:

Playing Dwayne Wade is the worst though, he gets more calls than ANYONE.

omac
10-05-2008, 01:17 PM
I hate superstar calls even when they are given to players of my own team (Kobe, Gasol and Vujacic most often).

Some of the most enjoyable NBA games I've watched have been when the refs keep things free flowing and don't interrupt with a call every 2-3 seconds. :lol:

Playing Dwayne Wade is the worst though, he gets more calls than ANYONE.

That's the problem with the NBA. They're pretty blatant when they want to protect their franchise names that bring in the money. They changed the palming/travelling rule when Jordan came into the league, then they started enforcing it again when he left. Superstar calls suck.

But sorry, back on topic ....

Defense! Go Denver! :rockon:

omac
10-05-2008, 01:20 PM
Well, Webster can hit a ton. However, is it Webster to whom Meck might
have referred when he said that big misses don't do any good?

-----

Wasn't that Ian Gold's department? :D

Den21vsBal19
10-05-2008, 01:55 PM
My suggestion to our Defense? Get some turnovers. Seriously, we've only gotten 1 turnover this season and that was against the Raiders. We need to do better on that front.
Two...........The hatless wonder (or is that wanderer? :confused: ) returned a fumble 30-some yards for 6 against the Saints

Retired_Member_001
10-05-2008, 01:57 PM
Two...........The hatless wonder (or is that wanderer? :confused: ) returned a fumble 30-some yards for 6 against the Saints

My bad. Still, two is not enough.

Two seasons ago, Shanahan held a list of the top Turnover teams in the league to try and get us motivated. He'd flash it to the defense on the sideline.

Maybe he should start doing that again?

topscribe
10-05-2008, 02:15 PM
Wasn't that Ian Gold's department? :D

Do you get the impression Webster may be Gold's heir apparent? :listen:

-----

Den21vsBal19
10-05-2008, 02:18 PM
My bad. Still, two is not enough.

Two seasons ago, Shanahan held a list of the top Turnover teams in the league to try and get us motivated. He'd flash it to the defense on the sideline.

Maybe he should start doing that again?
Oh I agree, but you've got to give the helmetless one his due ;)

Lord knows he needs to try something :frusty:

omac
10-05-2008, 02:18 PM
My bad. Still, two is not enough.

Two seasons ago, Shanahan held a list of the top Turnover teams in the league to try and get us motivated. He'd flash it to the defense on the sideline.

Maybe he should start doing that again?

Yeah, he can show a list of teams for turnovers, for pass defense, for rush defense, for INTs, for sacks .... :D

omac
10-05-2008, 02:21 PM
Do you get the impression Webster may be Gold's heir apparent? :listen:

-----

That's a bad joke .... :shocked: ... :D

Retired_Member_001
10-05-2008, 02:24 PM
Oh I agree, but you've got to give the helmetless one his due ;)

Lord knows he needs to try something :frusty:

Nate Webster may be the most clumsy linebacker in the history of Football. I mean he just launches himself head first into a player (resulting in a lost helmet). Problem is, 95% of the time he hits the ground instead of the player.

:laugh:

topscribe
10-05-2008, 02:25 PM
That's a bad joke .... :shocked: ... :D

Well, I surely would like to see how "undersized" 6-2, 240 lb. Larsen (who hits
like a truck), do in place of 6-0, 232 lb. Webster.

I still don't know how good he will be in the pros, but I'll tell you, in college
Larsen had an uncanny field awareness. He did not overrun plays, as we are
used to seeing right now.

-----