PDA

View Full Version : Foundations and the Future



G_Money
11-16-2008, 11:02 PM
When an architect builds a house, his first concern is the foundation. Without a strong foundation, the most beautiful house in the world will slide off a hill during a rainstorm. Getting the windows and the vaulted ceiling and the view from the deck to be perfect doesn't matter if your design is a few raindrops from turning into kindling.

Since Elway's departure, the Broncos have had foundational difficulties. We signed the wrong quarterbacks, traded for the wrong receivers, and lost our leaders to injuries and Father Time.

The Griese House slid off into the muck, which was a shame because the architecture was remarkably similar to what had won us our Super Bowls. But our design cannot work without a strong-armed, risk-taking quarterback, and Griese was neither of those things - and a remarkably poor leader to boot.

The Plummer House had other issues that were cropping up, but again (among other things) the quarterback choice was wrong. We got a gambler, but again not a leader, and not someone who could be relied upon when the game was on the line. Our 13-3 season looked pretty, but the wood was still rotting on the insides of the walls, no matter what the coat of paint looked like.

So we've torn that down and started laying the foundations for Cutler House. We ripped out all the old foundations from the Super Bowl years, the plumbing, everything. No more attempts to rework what we had built - we've finally decided to rebuild from the ground up.

So how are we doing, 2 and a half years into the project?

Our offensive line turnover has been nearly complete, and the quality of the work appears to be stunning at first glance. 8 sacks in 10 games speaks for itself. Both new tackles excel at pass protection. Our new guard is quite the immovable force inside. old-Guard players still man center and guard (though the center isn't OUR old-guard) but we have a new one waiting in the wings for one of those positions as well.

Our wide receivers are in fine form. Wideouts, tight ends, pass-catching running backs...we should have an arsenal worthy of playoff glory assembled for a few years to come now.

Our quarterback has the arm and the daring, and he seems to be coming along on the leadership qualities. He hates to lose, and he doesn't mind letting people know it, but that can be a good thing. It's imperative that our coaching staff makes it a good thing.

Our running back woes are well-documented, but of all the positions that could require fixing on the offense, I would consider this the best possible hole left to fix.

Our defense is definitely still under construction. I would still like to see us rework some of the blueprints for that side of the ball, but there are hopeful signs. Rookie linebackers playing better than the veterans, Rookie corners holding their own, a defensive line that seems to have come around on short-yardage and running plays. Still, it's an injury mess and there are dollars spent here that are not reaping their proper rewards. There's work to do - a LOT of work to do - but as a work in progress goes, the materials we have on site don't look quite as deficient as they did to start the year.

But what would you consider the foundation of a team? Is it the offensive line? Defensive? Defensive backfield? Offensive backfield? Surely it's the offensive backfield, with the Quarterback, isn't it? After all, that was the problem in our last two houses, wasn't it?


The foundation of any winning team is its players' will to win. When Elway House finally won its Super Bowls, it wasn't just because we improved the talent, it was because those teams were filled with winners, players that refused to back down to anyone. Green Bay was thought to totally outmann us, that their defensive line would crush our diminutive offensive one. Late in the game they were the ones taking steps backward, and we were the ones stepping forward.
We handed them that game based on strength of will.

And strength of will has been a problem for the Broncos recently. Smith had it. Wilson had it. Lynch had it. Nalen had it. But as they were injured and replaced, our new players did not have it. Hamza was not Lynch. DJ and Nate were not Al. Javon was not Rod.

The most important things to add to Cutler House were leadership and heart. It's the reason we tore the foundation up in the first place, to root out the cowardice that was weakening our foundation. We failed miserably in the free agent market to add these qualities, save with a certain slot receiver.

But this year it has become clear that the draft is providing us with the heart and leadership of this new team. On offense, Cutler, Marshall, Royal, Scheffler, Clady, Harris, Kuper and Hillis are all products of the last 3 drafts. 8 starters from 3 drafts, all of whom have heart. Kuper is a mauler with a broken hand. Hillis won us at least one game just on force of will alone. Scheffler another, with his gutsy performance last week with his still-damaged groin. Royal makes an impact every time he touches the ball. Marshall's will is obvious, and Jay's determination should be.

The offense is a group of good players who badly want to win, for themselves and for each other. When they struggle, it doesn't last. It doesn't poison the foundation, splinter it. The Bengals have discovered what happens when you have great talent on offense, many of whom play only for individual glory. We appear to have enough men of character on the offensive side of the ball to prevent that from happening, at least in the early returns.

On defense, though, we began the year with more problems than solutions.

The blueprint was terrible, and there was open complaint. As recently as two weeks ago, there was dissent. And then more injuries happened, and a strange by-product was born: toughness.

Replacements at linebacker brought effort and tackling to the fore. Two men with winning backgrounds and incredible personal character from a young age decided not to be a party to any of the in-fighting. They had already turned around the losing character of the special teams unit, and were now doing the same to the starting defense. Corners began to step up. If they could not change the blueprint then they could at least make sure that their own personal work was as good as it could be. The defensive line started to apply pressure to the run game, which allowed the rest of the defense to play pass with a knowledge of what should be coming.

It's not a strong unit. It's not a good blueprint. But it's a tremendous start.

Because what I was worried about, what concerned me most, was that we hadn't properly leeched the cowardice from our roster. That we blustered and roared like a lion, but would break down crying if Dorothy punched us in the nose.

The defense quit in earlier games. They did. There was rebellion and dissent in the ranks, and a leadership vacuum. And rookies - ROOKIES - have quieted the mutiny. The defense I've seen in the last three weeks doesn't look like quitters. It may not be a good defense, but everything it CAN do it looks like it will TRY to do. And that calms some of my fears about cojones and leadership, assuming we're smart and value those who have been thrown into the fire and thrived.

Heart. Courage. Will.

We're gaining back the qualities of a champion, and building the proper foundation in the process. Now build up these men of character and determination, train them well, and let them do what it is they are capable of doing: imposing their wills on the opponents when the game is on the line.

If more talent and leadership follow, things look good for Cutler House. We might even get a championship view from out its windows.

But don't rest on your laurels, architects - more work awaits.

And remember to bury Slowik before you finish pouring the concrete. :coffee:

~G

lex
11-16-2008, 11:09 PM
Although, that piece is a little myopic, you make good points. There has been a recent emphasis to draft character. I hated Travis Henry even when he was on the team. Im glad he's gone and Im glad that guys like we've been seeing (save Torain) have been entering the fold. The best thing is that we're still getting talented guys.

Broncospsycho77
11-16-2008, 11:10 PM
Transfer this over to the BF article section. Super solid stuff and couldn't agree more :salute:

omac
11-16-2008, 11:11 PM
Great article, G_Money! :salute: LOL at the Slowik comment ... didn't see that coming after all that prose. :D

G_Money
11-16-2008, 11:32 PM
Although, that piece is a little myopic, you make good points. There has been a recent emphasis to draft character. I hated Travis Henry even when he was on the team. Im glad he's gone and Im glad that guys like we've been seeing (save Torain) have been entering the fold. The best thing is that we're still getting talented guys.

Typed up a lot to this and Firefox just crashed so I lost it. :tsk:

So in brief:

- We didn't start valuing character until our most recent draft, after the Javon and Henry debacles, among other things. Until then we were just lucky if a draftpick also happened to be a good character guy. Moss and Thomas both had their issues that said they might not be, but we drafted them and gave up a lot for them anyway.

- but ALL of our rookies this year were drafted with character in mind. Even our UDFA additions like Woodyard. It's proving to be very, VERY important since I can't remember a year when this many rooks played this much for us, and in so many important roles.

- and yeah, adding the talent along with the character is a double-bonus. Shanny says Hillis may have the best hands on the team - which is correct, but also stunning when you wonder why he wasn't allowed on the field for the first 2 months. Woodyard is killing it at the Will, and in 2 games is everything people wanted first-rounder Rivers to be. Larsen is King Of Destruction on Special Teams but had to see injury and failure from multiple LBs to see duty on defense.

Now that they're getting the chance to prove that the defensive rookies don't lack in starting capability, though, I'm hopeful that they will continue to see the field for us for a while. We need all of them. Our defensive talent was hideous. It's sad that rookies are making the talent level better, but that's a process that has to continue next year if we're gonna have any hope of a defensive turnaround.

~G

lex
11-16-2008, 11:42 PM
Typed up a lot to this and Firefox just crashed so I lost it. :tsk:

So in brief:

- We didn't start valuing character until our most recent draft, after the Javon and Henry debacles, among other things. Until then we were just lucky if a draftpick also happened to be a good character guy. Moss and Thomas both had their issues that said they might not be, but we drafted them and gave up a lot for them anyway.

- but ALL of our rookies this year were drafted with character in mind. Even our UDFA additions like Woodyard. It's proving to be very, VERY important since I can't remember a year when this many rooks played this much for us, and in so many important roles.

- and yeah, adding the talent along with the character is a double-bonus. Shanny says Hillis may have the best hands on the team - which is correct, but also stunning when you wonder why he wasn't allowed on the field for the first 2 months. Woodyard is killing it at the Will, and in 2 games is everything people wanted first-rounder Rivers to be. Larsen is King Of Destruction on Special Teams but had to see injury and failure from multiple LBs to see duty on defense.

Now that they're getting the chance to prove that the defensive rookies don't lack in starting capability, though, I'm hopeful that they will continue to see the field for us for a while. We need all of them. Our defensive talent was hideous. It's sad that rookies are making the talent level better, but that's a process that has to continue next year if we're gonna have any hope of a defensive turnaround.

~G

Youre quite right about emphasizing character this year. I dont think Ive implied or explicitly stated otherwise. Im just saying that its quite pleasing to see fan favorites like Larsen finally get a chance at Mike and do well. The fact that he could fight through blocks and flow to the ball far surpasses anything weve seen the past 2 years...maybe more. And he's starting for us at fullback too. Holy hell! And I actually like Larsen before the draft. I watched him against USC and Oregon and he came up huge in both games. If he's not overwhelmed by either of those teams (since they likely had the most pro talent in the Pac 10), theres ample reason to think he may do ok at the next level. Its quite pleasing to see all of these low round and undrafted gems that many of us were liked step in and do well. It just goes to show that the Goodmans know what theyre doing moreso than Slowik does.

Its like you put this restriction on our draft picks, and it doesnt matter. We do better than we did before.

G_Money
11-16-2008, 11:47 PM
Definitely. And swapping out Sundquist appears to be one of the most important things Shanny could have done for the future of this franchise.

Hopefully swapping out Slowik has the same remarkable results.

~G

horsepig
11-16-2008, 11:58 PM
Well, G, who decided to START Larsen today? Shanny? I really doubt it. I'll bet my last cow turd that was Slowik's call. I liked the blitz package we had for this game. We still have giantic issues on the dee line. I saw a defense that played its ass off with Larsen at "mike". The rest of them played better and I love it

lex
11-17-2008, 12:08 AM
Well, G, who decided to START Larsen today? Shanny? I really doubt it. I'll bet my last cow turd that was Slowik's call. I liked the blitz package we had for this game. We still have giantic issues on the dee line. I saw a defense that played its ass off with Larsen at "mike". The rest of them played better and I love it

I think Moss and especially Thomas are starting to show improvement. I think part of the DLines problem is that theyre undemined by Slowiks horrific scheme where he gives the WRs a 10 yard cushion on 3rd and 4. When you do that, it kind of makes any pass rush you might generate irrelevant.

G_Money
11-23-2008, 07:20 PM
I knew writing this article before the Raiders game was gonna come back to bite me.

Still, looking at the Raiders game, what went wrong? Did we lose heart?

Yes, but more because we gave it away. Our offense refused to take advantage of Oakland early. The fumble hurt, but it was no worse than a really good punt. Momentum change is what you make of it. We were poor at it all game.

The coaching staff quit on the players today.

They didn't trust the running game.

They didn't trust receivers in the middle of the field.

They didn't trust Jay at the end of the half and instead wasted time to kick a FG. Jay was terrible today, but when you tell your offense that you'd rather waste time than allow them to screw up your 40-something yard field goal attempt, then they believe in that devaluation of their worth - especially as young kids.

Jay couldn't hit the broadside of a barn, but instead of giving him swing passes and pitch plays and screen and 5 yard hitches to give him some completions they kept running fly patterns down the side of the field - which he couldn't hit.

This team was trying to build confidence with the comebacks and grit of the last few weeks. The coaching staff just stole all of it from them.

The D played with heart in the first half. Hillis didn't back down after his fumble and played like a maniac all game.

But playcalling led to the punt that put the Raiders up at halftime. It gave away tries for a touchdown at the end of that half, and cost us a chance at a closer FG as well.

And it cut the heart out of our team today.

Someone might want to bring that up to Shanahan. Players make plays, but coaches put those players in a position to make plays.

Our coaches had our team out of position all day today on offense, wanting them to overcome their own coaching staff to win. The offense couldn't do it in the first half, and neither side could in the second.

Way to demoralize the troops, fellas. Might want to work on that.

~G

BroncoTech
11-23-2008, 10:21 PM
I hate to be the anti-troll but I have to agree with everything you say. I have to lay this one on Shanny and Cutty. I'm about disgusted enough after this game to think of a coaching change. Talk about drastic and dramatic...

Foochacho
11-23-2008, 11:21 PM
I am not calling for shanny's head but I wouldn't give a shit if he did get canned. A year or two ago it would of been a catastrophe in my eyes. My feelings this year have changed alot.

One reason is because of all these awful teams from the year before who had a dramatic turnaround in one year. And the other reason is that when we play teams like KC and Oakland ( Teams we should destroy) we lay a big egg. This whole week I kept thinking oakland was going to beat our ass and Shanny did not fail us.

I know that when Cutler is bad we lose, well I can't put these losses on cutler I put them on Shanny. why did we throw two deep balls before the half and not run it down the faid's throats. Running was working, we could of easily moved that ball down the field for either a touchdown or a FG all while running the clock down. Going into the locker room 3 or 7 points up is alot better than 7 points down. Mr. offensive genius needs to step up and take control, and if he already has then how did he get this "genius" tag?

Oakland rushed 41 times on us we were having a better rushing game why didn't we do it right back? Why allow Jay to keep lobbing it down the field when he is off? I saw Hillis open to the side of him for short dump passes so many times with no defender around. Those were easy 5- 10 yard plays with the way hillis can take on a defender one on one. Remember when that worked just a couple of weeks ago? No, why do that when we can just lob it up hoping someone catches it and hoping we don't get picked. \

It looked like a game of madden when you just wanna have fun and try for the hail mary every time. I am warming up to the idea of a coaching change. There has to be some coach smart enough to use what has worked before and not overthink everything.