PDA

View Full Version : Broncos O-Line Myth



eessydo
11-15-2007, 03:05 PM
There seems to be a growing consensus out there that the Broncos offensive line sucks. I am not one of those people and I would like to show you some proof of why I do not think that is the case.

Proof #1 - The running game

The Broncos are currently ranked:

13th in Rush Yards per game @ 117.8,
Tied for 4th in Average per rush @ 4.5, AND
Tied for 6th with 8 / 20+ yard carries

How does such an awful line account for such above average numbers?


Proof #2 - The Passing game

The Broncos are currently ranked:

Tied 16 for Sacks allowed (middle of the pack)
57.9% of our passing plays go for first downs (13th in the league)
Cutler is currently completing 64.9% of his pass plays (tied 11th)

----------------------------------------

Now I am not saying we can't do better, but I don't think the picture being painted is as horrible as we think it is.

We are clearly above average, just not elite. I would venture to say we still have a top 10 line. Our only issue is being physical in the red zone due to our smaller sized linemen.

Just a thought, up for debate.

TXBRONC
11-15-2007, 03:14 PM
There seems to be a growing consensus out there that the Broncos offensive line sucks. I am not one of those people and I would like to show you some proof of why I do not think that is the case.

Proof #1 - The running game

The Broncos are currently ranked:

13th in Rush Yards per game @ 117.8,
Tied for 4th in Average per rush @ 4.5, AND
Tied for 6th with 8 / 20+ yard carries

How does such an awful line account for such above average numbers?


Proof #2 - The Passing game

The Broncos are currently ranked:

Tied 16 for Sacks allowed (middle of the pack)
57.9% of our passing plays go for first downs (13th in the league)
Cutler is currently completing 64.9% of his pass plays (tied 11th)

----------------------------------------

Now I am not saying we can't do better, but I don't think the picture being painted is as horrible as we think it is.

We are clearly above average, just not elite. I would venture to say we still have a top 10 line. Our only issue is being physical in the red zone due to our smaller sized linemen.

Just a thought, up for debate.

Excellent post Eessy. Our problems scoring is why people say our line sucks especially in the red zone, which in my opinion has to do more with just a lack of execution. We move the ball well between the 20's but the red zone has just been tough. However, this past both of the offensive touchdown came in the red zone so maybe things are changing just a bit.

Requiem / The Dagda
11-15-2007, 04:51 PM
Anyone who watches the games knows that our pass protection is porous and Cutler is vulnerable. At best, we have an average offensive line.

It's no coincidence that the Broncos are scouting tackles HARDCORE.

Lonestar
11-15-2007, 06:15 PM
There seems to be a growing consensus out there that the Broncos offensive line sucks. I am not one of those people and I would like to show you some proof of why I do not think that is the case.

Proof #1 - The running game

The Broncos are currently ranked:

13th in Rush Yards per game @ 117.8,
Tied for 4th in Average per rush @ 4.5, AND
Tied for 6th with 8 / 20+ yard carries

How does such an awful line account for such above average numbers?


Proof #2 - The Passing game

The Broncos are currently ranked:

Tied 16 for Sacks allowed (middle of the pack)
57.9% of our passing plays go for first downs (13th in the league)
Cutler is currently completing 64.9% of his pass plays (tied 11th)

----------------------------------------

Now I am not saying we can't do better, but I don't think the picture being painted is as horrible as we think it is.

We are clearly above average, just not elite. I would venture to say we still have a top 10 line. Our only issue is being physical in the red zone due to our smaller sized linemen.

Just a thought, up for debate.

Food for thought sacks, YPC, total yards are not just a OLINE thing.

They are a combination between OLINE RB and QB and to some degree the WR's.

No QB can have decent stats with a really bad OLINE, but the QB RB and TE's can make the OLINE better with individual efforts.

If the QB is mobile and Jake was very good at this an Jay is getting better the sacks will be down or lower than a Manning who typically is a statue back there.

A good to great RB can get those extra yards a comparison between Thenry and Young this year to tater last year.. They get that extra yardage after contact where last year tater did not.. The TE this year are much better blocker for both the Run and pass than last year and the WR are catching the ball and blocking down field for each other and the RB's also.

So while the OLINE gets the glory in your eyes it is a combination of many things that make them look better than IMO they are.

omac
11-15-2007, 09:54 PM
I think with regards to run blocking, the line is doing fine; not yet at optimum, as there are way too many changes due to injuries, but definitely not bad either.

With regards to pass protection, I'd say they're about average. Aside from some points Jrwiz mentioned, another thing to consider is Jay gets rid of the ball pretty fast. That will always help the offensive line, and it's the same reason Houston's line looked better this season with Schaub versus last season with Carr. Deep plays require some time to happen, though, and Jay doesn't have that time in the pocket. Too much use of the rollout or bootleg makes it predictable to the defense, though.

No matter, not too many teams have great offensive lines to afford their QBs that luxury.

What's funny is the Bears have pretty good QB pass protection, but pretty bad QBs. I'd take our situation over theirs anyday. :D

Retired_Member_001
11-16-2007, 07:45 AM
There seems to be a growing consensus out there that the Broncos offensive line sucks. I am not one of those people and I would like to show you some proof of why I do not think that is the case.

Proof #1 - The running game

The Broncos are currently ranked:

13th in Rush Yards per game @ 117.8,
Tied for 4th in Average per rush @ 4.5, AND
Tied for 6th with 8 / 20+ yard carries

How does such an awful line account for such above average numbers?


Proof #2 - The Passing game

The Broncos are currently ranked:

Tied 16 for Sacks allowed (middle of the pack)
57.9% of our passing plays go for first downs (13th in the league)
Cutler is currently completing 64.9% of his pass plays (tied 11th)

----------------------------------------

Now I am not saying we can't do better, but I don't think the picture being painted is as horrible as we think it is.

We are clearly above average, just not elite. I would venture to say we still have a top 10 line. Our only issue is being physical in the red zone due to our smaller sized linemen.

Just a thought, up for debate.

No matter how much you people, who think our offensive line is ok, dig up these useless statistics on sacks allowed, you are wrong.

I've repeated this so many times it's not funny. Cutler is throwing the ball WAY too early than he should be. Cutler snaps the ball and immediately he see's 2 big bodies in his face. That's not how it should work.

Your top 10 line comment makes me want to vomit. We have a bottom 10 line.

gobroncsnv
11-16-2007, 07:55 AM
The standard we should be looking for is how clean Brady's uniform looks. The Lions have a really good Dline. Our oline needs to do better than them. We have had flashes of brilliance out of our guys, witness the Steelers game, and how we kept Jared Allen's name off of the player of the week list. But we need to be consistently better than we have shown. I do think the more these guys play together, the less of an issue this will be. But let's see how many times Haynesworth's name (and the Bears and Vikings are coming up, and don't forget SD) is called before we think they are "fine".

Retired_Member_001
11-16-2007, 07:57 AM
The standard we should be looking for is how clean Brady's uniform looks. The Lions have a really good Dline. Our oline needs to do better than them. We have had flashes of brilliance out of our guys, witness the Steelers game, and how we kept Jared Allen's name off of the player of the week list. But we need to be consistently better than we have shown. I do think the more these guys play together, the less of an issue this will be. But let's see how many times Haynesworth's name (and the Bears and Vikings are coming up, and don't forget SD) is called before we think they are "fine".

As I just said though, sacks allowed don't mean everything when your Quarterback is being forced to throw so quickly.

eessydo
11-16-2007, 09:47 AM
I think I will rebut on a couple of these comments.

FIRST, i will agree with everyone in here that external factors can make a difference. It is hard to pin things down on 1 statistic, BUT they are proof of success. We are not an anemic offense, and I think I can get a consensus with everyone in here that the O-line on any team has a large part in that success or failure. There are some statistical anomolies which I will address in a rebuttal below to another post, I just don't think we are one of those anomalies.

WHile statistics don't paint the ENTIRE picture, they are a good indicator of success or failure over long periods of time. Unfortunately we don't see all of the statistics for the O-line like QB pressures, and position ratings, but we have some data we can leverage.

eessydo
11-16-2007, 09:55 AM
Getting statistics on NFL.com isn't the best way to make an argument. Anyone who watches the games knows that our pass protection is porous and Cutler is vulnerable. At best, we have an average offensive line.

It's no coincidence that the Broncos are scouting tackles HARDCORE.

Again, not saying statistics are 100% accurate, but I don't think the pictures being painted by the alarmists are as grim as these statistics suggest.

eessydo
11-16-2007, 10:01 AM
Food for thought sacks, YPC, total yards are not just a OLINE thing. They are a combination between OLINE RB and QB and to some degree the WR's. No QB can have decent stats with a really bad OLINE, but the QB RB and TE's can make the OLINE better with individual efforts.

I would agree with this, and also say it is the same the other way around. You prove this with your tater vs. henry/young argument below. the o-line made tater LOOK better than he was. In fact Denver's O-line has done that for several running backs.



A good to great RB can get those extra yards a comparison between Thenry and Young this year to tater last year.. They get that extra yardage after contact where last year tater did not.. The TE this year are much better blocker for both the Run and pass than last year and the WR are catching the ball and blocking down field for each other and the RB's also.

FYI, if you look at our rushing game from last year to this year, our running game faired better in almost every statistic except yards per carry (4.4 vs. 4.5). Food for thought......;)

Mike
11-16-2007, 10:02 AM
Living in CO I get to see the games every week either on TV or in person.

Above average? :laugh:. Anyone watching the games, week in/week out, knows that the offensive line is not ok. Given the experience of players, that is to be expected though. But to say that they are above average is a joke. Honestly, saying average is pushing it too.

eessydo
11-16-2007, 10:03 AM
Getting statistics on NFL.com isn't the best way to make an argument. Anyone who watches the games knows that our pass protection is porous and Cutler is vulnerable. At best, we have an average offensive line.

It's no coincidence that the Broncos are scouting tackles HARDCORE.

No it is not, but we are not losing games because of our offense's complete ineptitude and we are not scouting a first round tackle which means we aren't looking for someone to be our franchise on Cutler's blind side.

Average is probably pretty accurate when you look at where we are in the passing game.

eessydo
11-16-2007, 10:11 AM
No matter how much you people, who think our offensive line is ok, dig up these useless statistics on sacks allowed, you are wrong.

I've repeated this so many times it's not funny. Cutler is throwing the ball WAY too early than he should be. Cutler snaps the ball and immediately he see's 2 big bodies in his face. That's not how it should work.

Your top 10 line comment makes me want to vomit. We have a bottom 10 line.

ALARMIST!!!!!!

This is the guy I was talking about. The sky is falling, the sky is falling!!!

We run a version of the west coast offense where the ball is supposed to get our of the QB's hands quickly. Preferably after the last step of the drop back. We execute timing routes and run a highly efficient passing game. He (Jay) currently has an unbelievable completion percentage and we have a very high % of those going for first downs. Could he use a little more time in the pocket, sure. But this is the NFL and there use to be a guy who use to get the ball out so quickly that it made for a really great team, his name, Joe Montana.

It is not like he is John Kitna of 05 / 06 laying flat on his back every pass.

With all that being said, show me some proof of how consistently and completely horrible we are and you may convince me.

eessydo
11-16-2007, 10:16 AM
The Lions have a really good Dline. Our oline needs to do better than them. We have had flashes of brilliance out of our guys, witness the Steelers game, and how we kept Jared Allen's name off of the player of the week list. But we need to be consistently better than we have shown. I do think the more these guys play together, the less of an issue this will be. But let's see how many times Haynesworth's name (and the Bears and Vikings are coming up, and don't forget SD) is called before we think they are "fine".

Good point, but I still think when you look at our passing game, which is average at best combined with our running game which is still above average, we have the makings of a line in the top 1/3 of the NFL. Now if we start looking at passing alone I would say middle of the road to JUST below average.

But then we identify anomolies like John Kitna, sacked 40 times this year but still throwing lights out. The only difference between him and cutler are two SUPERSTAR receivers.

We will see how it goes, our schedule does get a little tougher in terms of competitor defenses.

eessydo
11-16-2007, 10:17 AM
Living in CO I get to see the games every week either on TV or in person.

Above average? :laugh:. Anyone watching the games, week in/week out, knows that the offensive line is not ok. Given the experience of players, that is to be expected though. But to say that they are above average is a joke. Honestly, saying average is pushing it too.

How do you explain their success?

Mike
11-16-2007, 10:30 AM
How do you explain their success?

Have you actually gotten to see the games this year or are you just going by stats?

17 points/game...25 in the league in scoring. Success?

eessydo
11-16-2007, 10:53 AM
Have you actually gotten to see the games this year or are you just going by stats?

17 points/game...25 in the league in scoring. Success?

Good point, but I already accounted for this. I addressed this in my first post, please read the entire thread.

Mike
11-16-2007, 11:06 AM
I already accounted for this. I addressed this in my first post, please read the entire thread.

I have read the thread. You have glossed over it like it isn't that big of a factor.

You didn't answer my question. Have you been able to watch all the games this year or are you basing your opinion on stats? It is an important point. Seeing how the offense lines performs...seeing how the RBs run...and seeing how Cutler performs gives you more of a feel for things than just looking at stats.

I would be interested to see the play-by-play breakdown of our running game. It seems like an awful lot of 1-3 yard gains...with an occasional 8-13 yard gain to bring the average up.

Denver has been a top-5 rushing team for the past several years. The fact that they are now below the top-10 tells you that the line is struggling.

The pass blocking has been pathetic. Seriously pathetic. No stat will convince me that it has been anything other than below average. Cutler has gotten rid of the ball very quickly and has been nimble enough to avoid sacks. Success in the passing game has to be attributed to Cutler...because the o-line breaks down 2-3 seconds after the snap. I believe that is one of the reasons we saw Cutler in the shotgun more against KC. I expect to see the same against the Titans.

topscribe
11-16-2007, 11:11 AM
I have read the thread. You have glossed over it like it isn't that big of a factor.

You didn't answer my question. Have you been able to watch all the games this year or are you basing your opinion on stats? It is an important point. Seeing how the offense lines performs...seeing how the RBs run...and seeing how Cutler performs gives you more of a feel for things than just looking at stats.

I would be interested to see the play-by-play breakdown of our running game. It seems like an awful lot of 1-3 yard gains...with an occasional 8-13 yard gain to bring the average up.

Denver has been a top-5 rushing team for the past several years. The fact that they are now below the top-10 tells you that the line is struggling.

The pass blocking has been pathetic. Seriously pathetic. No stat will convince me that it has been anything other than below average. Cutler has gotten rid of the ball very quickly and has been nimble enough to avoid sacks. Success in the passing game has to be attributed to Cutler...because the o-line breaks down 2-3 seconds after the snap. I believe that is one of the reasons we saw Cutler in the shotgun more against KC. I expect to see the same against the Titans.

While I agree with you about the O-line's present level of play, from what
I've seen, I have heard glowing comments about Kuper's and Myers'
potential and what they may become after they jell and accumulate a little
experience. What is your take on this?

-----

Mike
11-16-2007, 11:17 AM
While I agree with you about the O-line's present level of play, from what
I've seen, I have heard glowing comments about Kuper's and Myers'
potential and what they may become after they jell and accumulate a little
experience. What is your take on this?

-----

This was my first response


Living in CO I get to see the games every week either on TV or in person.

Above average? :laugh:. Anyone watching the games, week in/week out, knows that the offensive line is not ok. Given the experience of players, that is to be expected though. But to say that they are above average is a joke. Honestly, saying average is pushing it too.

I think that some of the players on the o-line have potential. I also think the more they play together and the more game-time experience they get the better they will function. It is growing pains and should be expected. I don't care for Holland and Pears though. All in all, I am content to watch the young guys grow and will come to a conclusion about the state of the o-line at the end of the year.

eessydo
11-16-2007, 11:19 AM
LDB,

Yes I have watched each game, I just don't see it as bad as you do. My argument is that they are not as bad as most people think, your argument is that they are horrible.

I have seen many bootleg plays where someone is in cutlers face, but I have never been too sure if that is By design. I have seen plenty of plays where someone is in Jays face int he pocket, but he has the space to throw.

You say 2-3 seconds then the protection breaks down, hate to be the one to tell you this but a QB is supposed to get the ball out of his hands between 2.5 and 3.5 seconds from the snap to the receiver. Any longer and he risks getting put on his ass. So I don't think you have realistic expectations for what an O-lineman can do.

Everyone keeps pointing to New England, well they are exceptional. We are Good to average.

If Jay didn't have enough time to throw I would expect to see the interceptions way up or the sacks way up, the completion % way down or something to indicate that we are as horrible as you say we are.

I just don't see it. I do think we can upgrade a few spots on the O-line to jettison us back up the ladder in pass protection, but I don't think we are sitting at the bottom of the barrel.

I did provide some statistics comparing last years team to this years as it relates to some comments about henry vs. tater and our rushing game, but no comparisons to whether they are better or worse.

The argument here is that I don't think it is AS BAD AS PEOPLE, such as yourself, THINK IT IS. Nothing more.

Lonestar
11-16-2007, 01:41 PM
LDB,

Yes I have watched each game, I just don't see it as bad as you do. My argument is that they are not as bad as most people think, your argument is that they are horrible.

I have seen many bootleg plays where someone is in cutlers face, but I have never been too sure if that is By design. I have seen plenty of plays where someone is in Jays face int he pocket, but he has the space to throw.

You say 2-3 seconds then the protection breaks down, hate to be the one to tell you this but a QB is supposed to get the ball out of his hands between 2.5 and 3.5 seconds from the snap to the receiver. Any longer and he risks getting put on his ass. So I don't think you have realistic expectations for what an O-lineman can do.

Everyone keeps pointing to New England, well they are exceptional. We are Good to average.

If Jay didn't have enough time to throw I would expect to see the interceptions way up or the sacks way up, the completion % way down or something to indicate that we are as horrible as you say we are.

I just don't see it. I do think we can upgrade a few spots on the O-line to jettison us back up the ladder in pass protection, but I don't think we are sitting at the bottom of the barrel.

I did provide some statistics comparing last years team to this years as it relates to some comments about henry vs. tater and our rushing game, but no comparisons to whether they are better or worse.

The argument here is that I don't think it is AS BAD AS PEOPLE, such as yourself, THINK IT IS. Nothing more.

I've seen quite a few throws into the ground, short of the receiver. Past experience usually means a QB is being rushed into the throws..

How many of his throws have been off a back foot and while running a bootleg.

These are indicators that all is not good on the OLINE. Jake did not just run bootlegs because he was not 6"3" but because those routes he was throwing on were deeper routes that needed more time. Same goes for Jay he is running for his life when he is throwing cross body it is not just because he can but because he has to..


This OLINE is young, inexperienced and because they have not played next to each other this year not as good as you think they are..

eessydo
11-16-2007, 02:29 PM
I've seen quite a few throws into the ground, short of the receiver. Past experience usually means a QB is being rushed into the throws..

How many of his throws have been off a back foot and while running a bootleg.
.

Still not so sure here, you could say the same about every QB in this league, except maybe Manning and Brady.

His completion percentage to date this year, is higher than any % that Elway put up in a single season. 6.5 out of every 10 passes are completions!!! Wouldn't you expect the completion percentage to be much lower if he is constantly being rushed and not having opportunities to set his feet and throw the ball???

FYI:

On that bootleg play Jay always has a short option if the defender cinches in on that side. It is part of the design. If they elect to cover the short option, then he has gone deep. I view that play more like a screen if the DE or LB comes upfield. And just like a screen play, you have to throw off your backfoot over or around defenders coming upfield quickly to hit the target.

We always seem to get good yardage out of that play on the outlet pass because no one covers that receiver when the defender rushes the passer.

So the bootleg play may not be the best example for me to believe your argument due to the play action nature of the play and the designated blocking scheme and responsibilities. The O-lineman are responsible for selling the run, and if the defender stays home on contain, then Jay has to make a pass off his backfoot to an OPEN receiver (more often than not). Not a bad deal if you ask me....

Think of it as the NFL's version of the option.

Requiem / The Dagda
11-16-2007, 02:36 PM
So, what would you say in regards to the Broncos having an awfully keen eye on offensive tackles in this draft then?

Is that just coincidence?

TXBRONC
11-16-2007, 02:47 PM
So, what would you say in regards to the Broncos having an awfully keen eye on offensive tackles in this draft then?

Is that just coincidence?

You said this a few times but I can't recall seeing anything in print that says they are looking for OTs in the draft.

Requiem / The Dagda
11-16-2007, 03:01 PM
You said this a few times but I can't recall seeing anything in print that says they are looking for OTs in the draft.

Why would a beat reporter put such a thing out there? I asked almost all of them on the subject (draft) last year and they seemed almost clueless.

TXBRONC
11-16-2007, 03:11 PM
Why would a beat reporter put such a thing out there? I asked almost all of them on the subject (draft) last year and they seemed almost clueless.

In other words you don't know, you're guessing. And you talked to all the beat writers for the Broncos? I have a hard time believing that.

eessydo
11-16-2007, 03:12 PM
I've seen quite a few throws into the ground, short of the receiver. Past experience usually means a QB is being rushed into the throws..

How many of his throws have been off a back foot and while running a bootleg.
.

Still not so sure here, you could say the same about every QB in this league, except maybe Manning and Brady.

His completion percentage to date this year, is higher than any % that Elway put up in a single season. 6.5 out of every 10 passes are completions!!! Wouldn't you expect the completion percentage to be much lower if he is constantly being rushed and not having opportunities to set his feet and throw the ball???

FYI:

On that bootleg play Jay always has a short option if the defender cinches in on that side. It is part of the design. If they elect to cover the short option, then he has gone deep. I view that play more like a screen if the DE or LB comes upfield. And just like a screen play, you have to throw off your backfoot over or around defenders coming upfield quickly to hit the target.

We always seem to get good yardage out of that play on the outlet pass because no one covers that receiver when the defender rushes the passer.

So the bootleg play may not be the best example for me to believe your argument.

Requiem / The Dagda
11-16-2007, 03:13 PM
In other words you don't know, you're guessing. And you talked to all the beat writers for the Broncos? I have a hard time believing that.

I e-mailed quite a few of them during the draft last year - just curious to see if any scheduled visits were out there, and they didn't know. Actually, I'm not guessing, but whatever.

Lonestar
11-16-2007, 04:10 PM
Still not so sure here, you could say the same about every QB in this league, except maybe Manning and Brady.

His completion percentage to date this year, is higher than any % that Elway put up in a single season. 6.5 out of every 10 passes are completions!!! Wouldn't you expect the completion percentage to be much lower if he is constantly being rushed and not having opportunities to set his feet and throw the ball???

FYI:

On that bootleg play Jay always has a short option if the defender cinches in on that side. It is part of the design. If they elect to cover the short option, then he has gone deep. I view that play more like a screen if the DE or LB comes upfield. And just like a screen play, you have to throw off your backfoot over or around defenders coming upfield quickly to hit the target.

We always seem to get good yardage out of that play on the outlet pass because no one covers that receiver when the defender rushes the passer.

So the bootleg play may not be the best example for me to believe your argument due to the play action nature of the play and the designated blocking scheme and responsibilities. The O-lineman are responsible for selling the run, and if the defender stays home on contain, then Jay has to make a pass off his backfoot to an OPEN receiver (more often than not). Not a bad deal if you ask me....

Think of it as the NFL's version of the option.

First of all many of Johns earlier passes were almost uncatchable do to the velocity he threw. So unless the WR or TE was ready for it and was in perfect position to catch it many went as in-com-plete.

The bootleg is rarely used unless there is a problem with pass protection in DEN case it has been used for ever do to the smallish OLINE they have used for a long time It was a good option many brutish OLINE Teams do not need. How many time do you see manning or Brady rolling out manning almost never.

DO not get me wrong as much as I like Jake I think IF he lives long enough that Jay will be a really good to great QB. The key is keeping him off his back. he has had the crap beat out of him in college and even some this year. It is wonderful that he can take a lick but folks each one of them takes a toll. no matter how string he is. sooner or later he is going to get one to many concussions and then he is done.

This OLINE is not as good as you think it is being done with smoke and mirrirs..

gobroncsnv
11-16-2007, 07:40 PM
Everyone keeps pointing to New England, well they are exceptional. We are Good to average.


I am trying to figure out what would be wrong with having those kinds of expectations? I know, I know, injuries, youth, etc, etc. I don't EXPECT that level of play out of them RIGHT NOW, when they are still learning each other's names... I really DO expect them to improve, with more time in the saddle. But our sights need to be set on the kind of excellence that the Patriots have, or we just won't be able to beat teams with a front 7 like SD, Dallas, Detroit, Minn, Tenn, Jax (and there are more), and it will take an awful toll on Jay's longevity. We need to get there. Until we improve at both sides of the LOS, our reaching for the SB rings will be woefully short.

At QB, we were "good to average" with Jake... so we made the switch. Jay's development is commensurate with the progress we make at oline. Learning to play under pressure is good, but even better to learn to play without it. What a breath of fresh air that would be.

Like I said in a previous post, we'll get some good indicators of the oline's progress in the next few weeks. And please re-read the part where I said that they need more experience together, because I am not advocating tossing them...

TXBRONC
11-16-2007, 09:19 PM
I am trying to figure out what would be wrong with having those kinds of expectations? I know, I know, injuries, youth, etc, etc. I don't EXPECT that level of play out of them RIGHT NOW, when they are still learning each other's names... I really DO expect them to improve, with more time in the saddle. But our sights need to be set on the kind of excellence that the Patriots have, or we just won't be able to beat teams with a front 7 like SD, Dallas, Detroit, Minn, Tenn, Jax (and there are more), and it will take an awful toll on Jay's longevity. We need to get there. Until we improve at both sides of the LOS, our reaching for the SB rings will be woefully short.

At QB, we were "good to average" with Jake... so we made the switch. Jay's development is commensurate with the progress we make at oline. Learning to play under pressure is good, but even better to learn to play without it. What a breath of fresh air that would be.

Like I said in a previous post, we'll get some good indicators of the oline's progress in the next few weeks. And please re-read the part where I said that they need more experience together, because I am not advocating tossing them...


I honestly don't mean this as a slam on Jake but if the team was "good to average" Shanahan would have left him in as quarterback at the very least until the end of the season.

omac
11-16-2007, 09:46 PM
Well, the good news with Denver is that the line is comparable in size to NE.

Denver O-Line : 6'4 290, 6'4 302, 6'4 295, 6'2 322, 6'8 305

Pats O-Line : 6'4 305, 6'4 310, 6'2 296, 6'4 305, 6'4 315

A few guys need only gain anywhere from 10 to 15 pounds to match NE's weight; height-wise, they're pretty much even, so their frames could probably take the extra weight.

eessydo's right that there's no need to panick here; this line's about average or a little below average in pass protection, but Jay's been used to much worse. True, he can't leisurely sip a cup of coffee while looking for receivers the way Brady does, but maybe in time this line can afford him that time. And though Lepsis isn't playing at 100%, he does know how to protect Jay's backside, even taking a holding penalty when he has to.

Coming into this season, we had a need for pass-rushers and we got some pretty good ones. Coming into next season's draft or free agency, we'd need some really good run-stuffers in order to execute Bates' plan. We have other needs, but that seems to be the priority.

This line physically has the potential to pass-block well; they aren't as undersized as some people think, with some players needing to gain a few more pounds. It's their talent level and their ability to work as a team that will be crucial.

omac
11-16-2007, 09:55 PM
Just a quick note; some of Jay's passes against KC were being batted down because KC was able to push the line backwards into Jay so that they were practically in front of him. Jay's not a short QB, but when they're that close, he'd need to float his passes to avoid them getting knocked down and that's not a good thing. This line is pretty new, though, so I expect them to get only better.

Lonestar
11-17-2007, 01:20 AM
Well, the good news with Denver is that the line is comparable in size to NE.

Denver O-Line : 6'4 290, 6'4 302, 6'4 295, 6'2 322, 6'8 305

Pats O-Line : 6'4 305, 6'4 310, 6'2 296, 6'4 305, 6'4 315

A few guys need only gain anywhere from 10 to 15 pounds to match NE's weight; height-wise, they're pretty much even, so their frames could probably take the extra weight.

eessydo's right that there's no need to panick here; this line's about average or a little below average in pass protection, but Jay's been used to much worse. True, he can't leisurely sip a cup of coffee while looking for receivers the way Brady does, but maybe in time this line can afford him that time. And though Lepsis isn't playing at 100%, he does know how to protect Jay's backside, even taking a holding penalty when he has to.

Coming into this season, we had a need for pass-rushers and we got some pretty good ones. Coming into next season's draft or free agency, we'd need some really good run-stuffers in order to execute Bates' plan. We have other needs, but that seems to be the priority.

This line physically has the potential to pass-block well; they aren't as undersized as some people think, with some players needing to gain a few more pounds. It's their talent level and their ability to work as a team that will be crucial.


excellent post and research yet that 10-15 pounds really makes a difference.

But then NE is not as good as INDY is at protecting the passer

Ogh 6-5 305
liija 6-2 290
saturday 6-2 295
Scott 6-5 295
diem 6-6 320

All about the same size as our guys I wonder but do not have the time to check it out how these two teams do inside the red zone and even more .


Specific inside the 3-5 yard line..

Someone want to take this challenge?

I suspect that most of those TD's are passing ones.

Requiem / The Dagda
11-17-2007, 01:43 AM
What sort of arguments are we trying to make with the size?

Denver lacks top tier talent on the offensive line period. You don't protect your investment (Cutler) with second-day choices and undrafted free agents, regardless of the team's pedigree of success there. You pair young quarterbacks with elite lineman (or very good) coming out of school or you go through the free agent route. Denver needs an added boost. It'll come for sure.

Lonestar
11-17-2007, 01:48 AM
What sort of arguments are we trying to make with the size?

Denver lacks top tier talent on the offensive line period. You don't protect your investment (Cutler) with second-day choices and undrafted free agents, regardless of the team's pedigree of success there. You pair young quarterbacks with elite lineman (or very good) coming out of school or you go through the free agent route. Denver needs an added boost. It'll come for sure.


You know that mikey will never pay the price, pardon that pun, for getting top tier OLINE in here.

First of all we do not have the draft choices to do so and if he did it would admit failure that his misfits can't handle the load. DO you think his ego would allow that?

We have been a top tier running team since he got here using leftover guys, guys that most teams have passed over and most likely would not have made it in the NFL because of their size.

I know we need to upgrade here but he will never do it again after blowing the foster deal..

BigBroncLove
11-17-2007, 01:53 AM
WEll, I thumbed through most of the posts, but was unable to read everythng, so if I touch on sbjects already discussed into the ground, sorry.

That beign said, I think one big ssue not in discussion is the injuries this team has suffered at the offensive lne. We do not have Ben Hamilton, No Nalen, and basically have three rookies on the line, with a stop gap in Holland, and one real veteran i Lepsis who is recovering from injury. So right there, that should tell you a lot about this line. That being said, I think there are some positives and negatives this line has been showing even under such difficult circumstances.

I will say this, watching the past few games, with the rookeis in I have seen breakdowns in pass protection increase over the early weeks when we still had Nalen. PEars level of play has decreased as well IMO in the past few weeks, getting beaten badly after doing pretty well IMO through the first four weeks after facing some serious competition. He is going to have to impr ove his level of play from here on out and show some of the same flashes he did early in the year. Right now he is losing ground, not gaining it IMO.

IMO Kuper is my biggest concern. He is wildly inconsistent. Show signs of competing at a very hihg level one play and then getting pancaked by a DT the next. Of course who can forget that terrible fumble on the one yard line caused by Kupers big hand after the snap. He shows signs of strength and signs of weakness. I hope he can improve to show thos strengths more regularly.

Myers has filled in well IMO but the adjustments are being called by Lepsis, not MYers, and truely you should have a Center who can make those calls. None the less I think his level of play has been adequete though obviously not near to the level of a top Olineman. Hes young though and has plent of time to improve. These snaps hes been taking will only improve his ability IMO.

Holland is average at best IMO and is a stop gap for this team. None the less, given the injuries we have suffered we might see him longer then I prefer.

Lepsis is still doing a pretty damn good job against top DE's. He has obviously lost a step but is still doing well enough to warrent a pat on the back IMO. His kick out is worse then before, but he can still chip with the best of them and has been playing well.

I think we have all seen this Oline take a slump in pass protection. Cutler is beign rushed more. He is forcing passes even more now, and is forced to make big decisions udner duress. I don't like it but its a reality of the NFL. It is not panic time IMO. Everyone talks and talks about undersized this and blah blah blah that, but I don't think that is the issue here. You want size, remember Foster? size does not always equal better pass protection. Frankly given the fact we are playing with onlyone real veteran, and the entire interior of our line is new to starting or in their first year of the Broncos, I think they have preformed well enough to deserve some credit. Is there room for improvement? always. However I think people get their panties in a bunch to often wehn things arn't perfect. This is not the line the coaches expected to be on the field. Despite it they are still competing at an NFL level, and doing it adequetly enough IMO. Look at the Rams. They lost a few of their linemen and everything, and I mean everything went down the drain. We lose the same number of important characters to our line and things are still rolling. That is a testament in itself IMO to the potential and perhaps quality of thee young and new players....

gobroncsnv
11-17-2007, 10:46 AM
I honestly don't mean this as a slam on Jake but if the team was "good to average" Shanahan would have left him in as quarterback at the very least until the end of the season.

The point was more that he got replaced because of (in my opinion, average is NOT what we're looking for) his play last year. Overall, he had an average career, had a couple of good seasons with us. He was replaced because Shanny wanted to get some seasoning with Jay for a "better chance to win". It was a "down the road" move.
Right now, I think our Oline is playing at the same level... average. And that needs to change before we start to think of having SB expectations. And again, I'm not saying get rid of everybody... but they DO need to step up before we can have consistent success against the best.

omac
11-17-2007, 11:12 AM
What sort of arguments are we trying to make with the size?

Denver lacks top tier talent on the offensive line period. You don't protect your investment (Cutler) with second-day choices and undrafted free agents, regardless of the team's pedigree of success there. You pair young quarterbacks with elite lineman (or very good) coming out of school or you go through the free agent route. Denver needs an added boost. It'll come for sure.

The argument regarding size is in response to frequent comments that Denver's offensive line is too small to pass block, and is ideal only for run-blocking. To see if that thinking is correct, simply compare it with the sizes of a proven pass-blocking offensive line. In this case, Denver's line is not as small as people think.

On your statement about not protecting your investment with 2nd day choices and undrafted free agents, well with Indy, only 1 of their line starters was picked in the 1st round. One was picked in the 4th round, and another in the 5th. The other 2 were undrafted. Just a note that they don't always have to be high draft picks.

Requiem / The Dagda
11-17-2007, 02:56 PM
The argument regarding size is in response to frequent comments that Denver's offensive line is too small to pass block, and is ideal only for run-blocking. To see if that thinking is correct, simply compare it with the sizes of a proven pass-blocking offensive line. In this case, Denver's line is not as small as people think.

On your statement about not protecting your investment with 2nd day choices and undrafted free agents, well with Indy, only 1 of their line starters was picked in the 1st round. One was picked in the 4th round, and another in the 5th. The other 2 were undrafted. Just a note that they don't always have to be high draft picks.

I'm pretty sure that Tony Ugoh, was drafted in the early second round - or second round, and he's a LT.

Look at any team who has a premier quarterback or a young one, they've tried to pair them with top tackles coming out of school. That's the point I'm getting at. Tackle spots like LT should be addressed early, I think we can be fine with Day 2 guards (basically because there are few guards who get first day grades) but I'd like to see more emphasis placed on tackles early.

Requiem / The Dagda
11-17-2007, 03:03 PM
You know that mikey will never pay the price, pardon that pun, for getting top tier OLINE in here.

First of all we do not have the draft choices to do so and if he did it would admit failure that his misfits can't handle the load. DO you think his ego would allow that?

We have been a top tier running team since he got here using leftover guys, guys that most teams have passed over and most likely would not have made it in the NFL because of their size.

I know we need to upgrade here but he will never do it again after blowing the foster deal..

I think the Broncos may suffer from cold feet regarding a tackle in the first round due to Foster, but I have it on good word that the Broncos are sincerely interested in offensive tackles in this draft (as they should be, a phenomenal class - both junior and senior) and are looking to upgrade. Lepsis doesn't have much left, and Pears was NEVER cut out for the right side. You and I both know that the right side should have guys who are strong on the running game, and the left side should be protecting Cutler more than anything. We don't have that on the right side, and our left side is struggling a little bit.

I know some people think I'm guessing, but this "good word" comes from the people I've come to know who told me about #37 for Javon Walker, Denver wanted to trade up for a QB, Tony Scheffler being a possible second-round target for Denver (when a lot of people never even heard of him) and that Moss, Harrell and Timmons (if you can remember, all three I had as avatars at some point at Broncomania) would be of keen interest to the Broncos - oh, and how I consistently had Ryan Harris and Tim Crowder in my mock drafts (which wasn't by coincidence - but those were more of my "gut" speaking to me) as Denver selections.

Over the past two years, I've got some great information from people who get to be in Mobile and Indianapolis when the teams complete their boards and assess the prospects. With that given help, and how accurate it was - I do believe Denver has interest in upgrading the tackle position.

They might be out of range for an elite LT, but there are guys who can be around who would be a premium upgrade over Pears or an ailing Lepsis.

Part of the reason why people are upset with Graham is because he's not catching passes - but it's hard to do when you're playing training wheels for an inept right side of the line who cannot do CRAP without him there. I think you've noticed, that when Graham is on the right side, the big runs happen and the blocks get sealed.

Holland has been crap since FSU (and I don't think anyone is a bigger FSU homer than me here) and Pears is just a typical local kid with limited talent and no upside. Denver needs to replace some of these items. I sure hope they do.

Whether or not they will who knows, but as I said - I have a feeling they will. It's tough to believe, but I'll buy it for now. At least it gives me some hope that Jay won't be killed on the field by his third year.

Lonestar
11-17-2007, 03:05 PM
The argument regarding size is in response to frequent comments that Denver's offensive line is too small to pass block, and is ideal only for run-blocking. To see if that thinking is correct, simply compare it with the sizes of a proven pass-blocking offensive line. In this case, Denver's line is not as small as people think.

On your statement about not protecting your investment with 2nd day choices and undrafted free agents, well with Indy, only 1 of their line starters was picked in the 1st round. One was picked in the 4th round, and another in the 5th. The other 2 were undrafted. Just a note that they don't always have to be high draft picks.

a good and well thought out post.

I see it as out OLINE as long as it is smallish and quick k and really designed to zone block they will never be a great drop back pass protectors. The might be adequate but not on the level that NE or Indy will be they seem to be two different techniques and I'm not sure we can adapt them both to our OLINE.

When I played OG we did not zone block like DEN does we learned how to take our man on one on one and keep him away from either the running back or QB. We did not act in a concerted way that everyone moves at the same time in the same direction, like the zone blocking scheme seems to do.

I'm not an expert here but it seems like two totally different ways to do it.

Perhaps someone else that did not do this in the early sixties can shed some light on it..

I do know from way back it was always the strongest, biggest and fastest that generally won the block.

Retired_Member_001
11-17-2007, 05:40 PM
You know that mikey will never pay the price, pardon that pun, for getting top tier OLINE in here.

First of all we do not have the draft choices to do so and if he did it would admit failure that his misfits can't handle the load. DO you think his ego would allow that?

We have been a top tier running team since he got here using leftover guys, guys that most teams have passed over and most likely would not have made it in the NFL because of their size.

I know we need to upgrade here but he will never do it again after blowing the foster deal..

I know Shanahan loves these horrible, sixth round pick lineman, but EVEN Shanahan has to admit that there are problems with the offensive line. At the end of last season I remember Shanahan saying the offensive line needed to get better, he did nothing about it besides drafting Ryan Harris but at least he recognized there was a problem there.

I wouldn't be suprised if Shanahan was looking at first day tackles because he knows that the other two options would be unacceptable. The other two options would be to have his Quarterback get killed and therefore have his offense die as well, or the other option would be to spend $100mill on offensive lineman in FA.

To make this offensive line good we need either two GOOD first day picks and one good FA, or one good first day pick and two good FA's.

Just to add, I bet everyone who thought I was crazy for doubting this offensive line feels pretty stupid now.

Broncos Mtnman
11-17-2007, 05:42 PM
Why would a beat reporter put such a thing out there? I asked almost all of them on the subject (draft) last year and they seemed almost clueless.

No source means no proof. YOU ALWAYS CALL PEOPLE WITHOUT DOCUMENTATION FOR THEIR POSITIONS.


Nice try.

BANJOPICKER1
11-17-2007, 08:05 PM
I've seen quite a few throws into the ground, short of the receiver. Past experience usually means a QB is being rushed into the throws..

How many of his throws have been off a back foot and while running a bootleg.

These are indicators that all is not good on the OLINE. Jake did not just run bootlegs because he was not 6"3" but because those routes he was throwing on were deeper routes that needed more time. Same goes for Jay he is running for his life when he is throwing cross body it is not just because he can but because he has to..


This OLINE is young, inexperienced and because they have not played next to each other this year not as good as you think they are..

Could also be it Jays 2nd year as a starting QB???

topscribe
11-17-2007, 08:37 PM
I bet everyone who thought I was crazy for doubting this offensive line feels pretty stupid now.

I never thought you were crazy, but I don't feel stupid, either. I think the
O-line actually is doing a pretty good job, considering what they have to deal
with. Their best player (Nalen) is out, and their second best (Lepsis) obviously
is still recovering from his injury, with limited mobility, especially to his left.
Their third best (Hamilton) has been out all year, of course.

Four factors lend themselves to the difficuties the line has been facing: (1)
three (60%) are in their second year, (2) none of the linemen have played
together, (3) two of the three of the second-year players are playing at
positions they did not play last year, and (4) they are playing for a new QB
with a relatively new offensive scheme.

I'll tell you, I'm pretty happy with the people the Broncos have, considering
the job they have done in face of all those difficulties. (I'd like them to be
looking for a replacement especially for Holland, though.)

-----

TXBRONC
11-17-2007, 09:11 PM
I think the Broncos may suffer from cold feet regarding a tackle in the first round due to Foster, but I have it on good word that the Broncos are sincerely interested in offensive tackles in this draft (as they should be, a phenomenal class - both junior and senior) and are looking to upgrade. Lepsis doesn't have much left, and Pears was NEVER cut out for the right side. You and I both know that the right side should have guys who are strong on the running game, and the left side should be protecting Cutler more than anything. We don't have that on the right side, and our left side is struggling a little bit.

I know some people think I'm guessing, but this "good word" comes from the people I've come to know who told me about #37 for Javon Walker, Denver wanted to trade up for a QB, Tony Scheffler being a possible second-round target for Denver (when a lot of people never even heard of him) and that Moss, Harrell and Timmons (if you can remember, all three I had as avatars at some point at Broncomania) would be of keen interest to the Broncos - oh, and how I consistently had Ryan Harris and Tim Crowder in my mock drafts (which wasn't by coincidence - but those were more of my "gut" speaking to me) as Denver selections.

Over the past two years, I've got some great information from people who get to be in Mobile and Indianapolis when the teams complete their boards and assess the prospects. With that given help, and how accurate it was - I do believe Denver has interest in upgrading the tackle position.

They might be out of range for an elite LT, but there are guys who can be around who would be a premium upgrade over Pears or an ailing Lepsis.

Part of the reason why people are upset with Graham is because he's not catching passes - but it's hard to do when you're playing training wheels for an inept right side of the line who cannot do CRAP without him there. I think you've noticed, that when Graham is on the right side, the big runs happen and the blocks get sealed.

Holland has been crap since FSU (and I don't think anyone is a bigger FSU homer than me here) and Pears is just a typical local kid with limited talent and no upside. Denver needs to replace some of these items. I sure hope they do.

Whether or not they will who knows, but as I said - I have a feeling they will. It's tough to believe, but I'll buy it for now. At least it gives me some hope that Jay won't be killed on the field by his third year.


This kind of a mixed message Dream. You either have inside information or don't. I think its that you don't have inside information considering our previous exchange.

Requiem / The Dagda
11-17-2007, 11:01 PM
This kind of a mixed message Dream. You either have inside information or don't. I think its that you don't have inside information considering our previous exchange.

I said in my message that the offensive tackle talk is coming from the people that I've referred two over the past two drafts.

Anyways I'm out for a movie.

The answer is yes. "Inside" info.

TXBRONC
11-18-2007, 01:20 AM
I have to agree, the line is very average. Turnovers and bad field position hurt MORE IMO.

This isn't the 2003 KC offensive line, but it's not the league's worst either. It's win some/ lose some in short yardage situations with this team (my opinion after going back and watching this team in short yardage situations this year).

That being said, Denver has a desperate need for a quality tackle prospect. Lepsis is not having a great year (and his age is a concern) and Pears should not be a starting RT.

That's a great point Nas. I think our offense has been near the bottom of average starting field position.

It doesn't surprise that Lepsis has struggled this year considering he was coming off a major injury. Pears I think is doing ok, more than anything he's still raw. The one offensive line I have been the least impressed with is Holland.

Simple Jaded
11-18-2007, 02:34 AM
Well, the good news with Denver is that the line is comparable in size to NE.

Denver O-Line : 6'4 290, 6'4 302, 6'4 295, 6'2 322, 6'8 305

Pats O-Line : 6'4 305, 6'4 310, 6'2 296, 6'4 305, 6'4 315

A few guys need only gain anywhere from 10 to 15 pounds to match NE's weight; height-wise, they're pretty much even, so their frames could probably take the extra weight.

eessydo's right that there's no need to panick here; this line's about average or a little below average in pass protection, but Jay's been used to much worse. True, he can't leisurely sip a cup of coffee while looking for receivers the way Brady does, but maybe in time this line can afford him that time. And though Lepsis isn't playing at 100%, he does know how to protect Jay's backside, even taking a holding penalty when he has to.

Coming into this season, we had a need for pass-rushers and we got some pretty good ones. Coming into next season's draft or free agency, we'd need some really good run-stuffers in order to execute Bates' plan. We have other needs, but that seems to be the priority.

This line physically has the potential to pass-block well; they aren't as undersized as some people think, with some players needing to gain a few more pounds. It's their talent level and their ability to work as a team that will be crucial.

Those are just listed numbers, omac.

It's just something the Broncos do, they list the HT's, WT's as they were when the player began his stay with the team, as soon as Denver gets them into the fold they drop the players weight.

Myers own father believes Chris' playing weight was between 287 and 291 the last time he talked with him, not the 300 the team used to have on it's web site.

Schlereth said he was 295 when he was signed with Denver, 285 when he left.

295 is incredibly small for an offensive lineman, 285 is just plain stupid unless you're a center.

The Broncos line has been a problem for years and it's even worse with the injury to Nalen.

I don't need shiny stats and articulate arguments to know what an untrained eye can tell me on a regular basis....This line just cannot get it done in certain situations. They just can't!!!

If sexy, between-the-20's stats are what turns you on, then the Broncos line must be Jessica Alba to you......

Requiem / The Dagda
11-18-2007, 02:39 AM
No source means no proof. YOU ALWAYS CALL PEOPLE WITHOUT DOCUMENTATION FOR THEIR POSITIONS.


Nice try.

So do you want me to reveal e-mails and such from other people and post them on here as proof for you to see, or would you like me to start recording phone calls? If you think I'm talking out my rear, so be it - but this is the same rear talking that mentioned Harrell, Moss and Timmons before anyone was even thinking about them last year, consistently placing Ryan Harris and Tim Crowder in mock drafts in November (yes, the November before the draft) and in 2006 - ended up having en ex-scout from several NFL teams who was able to sit down in the 49ers War Room and observe a call with the Broncos about trading up for a quarterback. Not to mention, predicting #37 for Javon Walker (even though Denver tried trading up to their spot, one spot ahead of San Francisco's - which makes sense, and even makes my story and case more solid) and the mention of Tony Scheffler to several members over on the Mane as a possible target for the Broncos on Day One.

I've been fortunate enough to be able to correspond with people who go to Mobile and Indianapolis, since I cannot afford to go to Mobile myself (500 dollar plain ticket is ridiculous!) and observe such things, so I ask around and you pick up a few tid bits here and there.

I always thought it was "nice" of me to share anything (even if it's a rumor, because they're always interesting) around on the forums because people appreciated it. Questions are always welcome, and they in fact were when discussing the ex-scout from professional teams - but you learn from your mistakes (AKA having them come on a forum and defend you) - even when you're proven to be right in the first place.

Even without this information, are you really that surprised that Denver would be looking to protect their golden boy quarterback?

It's common sense people, and "rumors" don't have to be thrown out there to understand it.

When you have two tackles struggling like ours are, and the fact that this tackle class is epic (perhaps six or seven first-rounders) - teams are going to pay attention to it, and with very little depth and quality at the position, I'm fairly certain the Broncos are looking at it. I'll trust those who have been right in the past who have given such great information since they've been right. After a while, you don't ask questions.

All and all, I think it's exciting more than anything. I'd be shocked if we didn't take a tackle early on this year. SHOCKED.

Simple Jaded
11-18-2007, 02:50 AM
Speaking of the Colts o-line, even as bad as it's been for Manning LATELY, when was the last time Manning nearly had his leg snapped before he could complete a freakin THREE STEP DROP?

Before their injuries, the Colts have had one of the best lines in the league....Especially last year.

Howard Mudd is a great O-line coach!

Anybody who would dare to dream that Cutler even come close to Mannings level of play should hope for the same kind of level of Manning has enjoyed from his O-line. And this Denver line has ZERO chance of ever doing that, imo.

Imo, Kuper (And MAYBE Myers if he is the future at center...He won't be able to do it at guard) seems to be the only long term player that has this kind of ability....That includes Harris, the Broncos better hope he can at least provide depth......

omac
11-18-2007, 04:21 AM
I'm pretty sure that Tony Ugoh, was drafted in the early second round - or second round, and he's a LT.

Look at any team who has a premier quarterback or a young one, they've tried to pair them with top tackles coming out of school. That's the point I'm getting at. Tackle spots like LT should be addressed early, I think we can be fine with Day 2 guards (basically because there are few guards who get first day grades) but I'd like to see more emphasis placed on tackles early.

Oops, you're right, my mistake; Ugoh was taken in the 2nd round, not the first round. So Indy's using a 2nd rounder, 4th and 5th rounder, as well as 2 undrafted players on their front line.

I agree the LT is crucial not only to pass protection, but the long term health of your QB, so I wouldn't mind a high pick here. Before his injury, though, Lepsis was doing fine. For next seasons draft, though, I think the more pressing need is defensive tackles and some linebacker depth.

omac
11-18-2007, 05:15 AM
I never thought you were crazy, but I don't feel stupid, either. I think the
O-line actually is doing a pretty good job, considering what they have to deal
with. Their best player (Nalen) is out, and their second best (Lepsis) obviously
is still recovering from his injury, with limited mobility, especially to his left.
Their third best (Hamilton) has been out all year, of course.

Four factors lend themselves to the difficuties the line has been facing: (1)
three (60%) are in their second year, (2) none of the linemen have played
together, (3) two of the three of the second-year players are playing at
positions they did not play last year, and (4) they are playing for a new QB
with a relatively new offensive scheme.

I'll tell you, I'm pretty happy with the people the Broncos have, considering
the job they have done in face of all those difficulties. (I'd like them to be
looking for a replacement especially for Holland, though.)

-----

Nice post, topscribe; considering all the transitions, it's difficult for a new line like this to suddenly gel like a unit that's been playing together for a long time. For their circumstances, they're doing pretty good.


I don't need shiny stats and articulate arguments to know what an untrained eye can tell me on a regular basis....This line just cannot get it done in certain situations. They just can't!!!

If sexy, between-the-20's stats are what turns you on, then the Broncos line must be Jessica Alba to you......

The difficulty with people is that everyone is biased, whether they admit it or not. To an optimist, a team looks much better than they really are, and to a pessimist, they look much worse than they really are. That bias affects the way people judge something objectively.

Statistics can help to prove or disprove a point. When Jrwiz or Morambar or whoever uses actual statistics to further prove their argument, it carries much more weight than someone with an argument who bases it on what he thinks he sees.

By your last statement, though, you obviously haven't read my posts on this thread before commenting. I posted on this thread that I thought this offensive line was average to below average; since when has Jessica Alba been average or below average? :D

Lonestar
11-18-2007, 10:35 AM
Oops, you're right, my mistake; Ugoh was taken in the 2nd round, not the first round. So Indy's using a 2nd rounder, 4th and 5th rounder, as well as 2 undrafted players on their front line.

I agree the LT is crucial not only to pass protection, but the long term health of your QB, so I wouldn't mind a high pick here. Before his injury, though, Lepsis was doing fine. For next seasons draft, though, I think the more pressing need is defensive tackles and some linebacker depth.


Nice post, topscribe; considering all the transitions, it's difficult for a new line like this to suddenly gel like a unit that's been playing together for a long time. For their circumstances, they're doing pretty good.



The difficulty with people is that everyone is biased, whether they admit it or not. To an optimist, a team looks much better than they really are, and to a pessimist, they look much worse than they really are. That bias affects the way people judge something objectively.

Statistics can help to prove or disprove a point. When Jrwiz or Morambar or whoever uses actual statistics to further prove their argument, it carries much more weight than someone with an argument who bases it on what he thinks he sees.

By your last statement, though, you obviously haven't read my posts on this thread before commenting. I posted on this thread that I thought this offensive line was average to below average; since when has Jessica Alba been average or below average? :D


There are optimist pessimists and realists. I prefer to think I'm in the later category While I wish to win, I realize that beating the really good teams is going to take a stroke of luck or true heroics to do so. 3 or more of our wins are pegged on same.

Now some say you make your own breaks and that is the skill level we had to do this. Those are the OPTIMISTS supreme.

The pessimists will say we suck.

I say were are not that good a team and if it were not for the missing of the FG on the second shot our last second FG's from Elam and those Forced fumble and the quick TD thereafter those game might have turn out different than they did.

This team will not but playoff caliber until we win consistently without consistent last minute theatrics or lucky bounces..

Can we get there and rely on the any given Sunday mantra? Sure, I for one would rather have shock and aw that we had in the Superbowl years. Kick Butt and take names later.

Much like NE is doing this year. There is very little doubt in anyones mind that they are the best team in the NFL this year.

I do not wish to slither in on a hope and a prayer.

omac
11-18-2007, 01:05 PM
There really aren't that many fans who are objective enough to be called realists. Most lean either towards optimism or pessimism. If you strive towards realism, then that's a good thing. :cheers:

Retired_Member_001
11-18-2007, 04:31 PM
I never thought you were crazy, but I don't feel stupid, either. I think the
O-line actually is doing a pretty good job, considering what they have to deal
with. Their best player (Nalen) is out, and their second best (Lepsis) obviously
is still recovering from his injury, with limited mobility, especially to his left.
Their third best (Hamilton) has been out all year, of course.

Four factors lend themselves to the difficuties the line has been facing: (1)
three (60%) are in their second year, (2) none of the linemen have played
together, (3) two of the three of the second-year players are playing at
positions they did not play last year, and (4) they are playing for a new QB
with a relatively new offensive scheme.

I'll tell you, I'm pretty happy with the people the Broncos have, considering
the job they have done in face of all those difficulties. (I'd like them to be
looking for a replacement especially for Holland, though.)

-----

I wasn't actually talking about you Top when it came to those who called me crazy. Anyway:

We should have been prepared for this though. Ben Hamilton wouldn't have done a better job than Chris Myers or even Chris Kuper has done at LG so Ben Hamilton wasn't that much of a loss, I know you think Ben Hamilton is our third best offensive lineman but when it comes to pass blocking Hamilton's play is simply :shocked:. We also should have been prepared for some rusty play from Matt Lepsis, we should have known that Lepsis was on his last legs. Now Nalen is irreplaceable and I can understand a drop in play from when he got injured.

Anyway here's the point, if we had REAL lineman (not reffering to them being underweight by the way) then we wouldn't have this issue. Look at the Colts offensive line against San Diego last week, they had 3 guys out of position and they were STILL one of the better offensive lines in football. That's what we should be like.

BigBroncLove
11-18-2007, 04:58 PM
Just to add, I bet everyone who thought I was crazy for doubting this offensive line feels pretty stupid now.

Some of us still think your crazy and we don't feel stupid :P ;) .

I won't go over things agin, because top pretty much laid it down perfectly. The Oline has been facing serious obstacles many other teams have not been saddled with. Its a reality of the NFL that your backups will nto play as well as your starters. Theres a reason they arn't the starters after all. I also strongly disagree with your sentiments on HAmilton. Stats don't tell the whole story but he has only allowed 3.75 sakcs in the last three years. That averaging about one sack per year. Last year he was a major reason we had any running game and pass protection at all (him and Nalen after Carlisle slipped in his level of play, Foster sucked, and Lepsis was injured). HAmilton is a solid player and there was a major reason he was the heir apparent to the Center position if NAlen went out before his concussion, he is a smart and capable player.

Also I believe the Broncos did address Lepsis's difficulties. Theres a reason we drafted a left tackle in the third. Whether he proves worthy of his third round selection remains to be seen, but they obviously were looking to replace him and very very few LT's are able to step up and play in their first season, especially in a complicated scheme like the Broncos.

Few teams have the stout Olines that the Colts have, and thats because they are the exception not the rule. I certienly would like to have a line like the Colts but I also believe that sometiems when you have to build WR cores, secondaries, and Dlines lke the Broncos have needed to these past years you may not get the chance to do so. Its not as if the Colts line is built on high draft picks like you prefer. Jeff Saturday was an undrafted rookie FA, Ryan Lilja (RG) was also undrafted, JAke Scott (LG) was a fifth round selection, and Ryan Diem was a fourth round selection. Only the newly drafted ugoh was a high draft pick, and none of the established veteran players were first day grabs, much like the Broncos line. Grabing first day guys doesn't mean you'll be building the great Oline of the future.

Also I believe there is a vast difference between pass blocking for a potent passer like Manning who commands enough respect to force defenses to constantly worry about the pass (even without Clark and Harrison) then a second year QB without the same number of big weapons (Henry and Walker). I also felt Manning came under more pressure and had to dance aroudn in the pocket more against the Chargers then he had all season long. If the Colts had to play all season long under such circumstances then I think it would be a fair comparison but one game isn't a really good teller IMO.

Like top, I am pretty pleased how the Broncos Oline ahs performed udner such trying conditions.

topscribe
11-18-2007, 05:21 PM
I wasn't actually talking about you Top when it came to those who called me crazy. Anyway:

We should have been prepared for this though. Ben Hamilton wouldn't have done a better job than Chris Myers or even Chris Kuper has done at LG so Ben Hamilton wasn't that much of a loss, I know you think Ben Hamilton is our third best offensive lineman but when it comes to pass blocking Hamilton's play is simply :shocked:. We also should have been prepared for some rusty play from Matt Lepsis, we should have known that Lepsis was on his last legs. Now Nalen is irreplaceable and I can understand a drop in play from when he got injured.

Anyway here's the point, if we had REAL lineman (not reffering to them being underweight by the way) then we wouldn't have this issue. Look at the Colts offensive line against San Diego last week, they had 3 guys out of position and they were STILL one of the better offensive lines in football. That's what we should be like.

How many are 2nd year players? Had they ever played together before, at
any position? What about the other two players . . . are they playing
injured?

These are honest questions. I'm asking because I don't know.

-----

Simple Jaded
11-18-2007, 06:17 PM
....I'll give you an example:

Against the Chefs last week Pears goes down.

The next play Ryan Harris is in for Pears.

The next down the Broncos call a pass play, sending only three into patterns....Marshall wide right, Scheffler middle and Stokley wide left.

The Broncos go max protection presumably to protect the rookie Harris, yet Graham stays in to take on Jared Allen (Leaving Lesis to actually double team the DT with Kuper :2thumbs:)....Graham dominates Allen, btw, leaving you wondering if Allen was a decoy. Selvin Young stays in to help on Allen yet is completely oblivious to the blitzing SS that Harris doesn't see til it's too late because he's fooled by a defensive line stunt.

Scheffler is double teamed by N. Harris and Edwards...Stokley is doubled by Law over the top and D. Johnson.

Leaving Marshall the only one in single coverage and the only one Cutler doesn't have the time to hit due to the SS coming in untouched.

The result? Cutler forced a throw into Stokley and it's picked off by D. Johnson who is drifting underneath only because Graham/Young have to stay in the help the O-line..

No excuse for Cutler, he should have taken the sack, yet he threw it right where they wanted him to throw it....But this is indicative of the Broncos line for years. They cannot pass protect at a high level.

Coaching and lack of talent have been a problem for years. Making Nalens shoes even harder to fill.

When the guards/centers (Hamilton/Myers) aren't getting plowed by the DT's, the tackles are completely wiffing on the outside.

This is why Graham is "a bust", and it's why the Broncos call so many HB screens and max protection. It's why they don't throw deep, it's why the play calling is conservative.

And now there is too little depth to give anybody hope if someone else goes down. If that's not enough, the Broncos offensive line notoriously fades as the season goes on.

This doesn't even begin to compare to the problems they have in goal line/short yardage, which is comical.

The Broncos offense, and particularly Cutler, will never be as good as it/he can be til the offensive line is back to a SB level.

The O-line sucks to the point that it's not even debatable, imo, and it was like that long before there were injury problems......

Requiem / The Dagda
11-18-2007, 07:27 PM
How many are 2nd year players? Had they ever played together before, at
any position? What about the other two players . . . are they playing
injured?

These are honest questions. I'm asking because I don't know.

-----

Shane Olivea, 4th year player.

Mike Goff, 10th year player. (Four with Chargers.)

Nick Hardwick, 4th year player.

Kris Dielman, 5th year player. (Started four years.)

Marcus McNeill, 2nd year player.

So Hardwick, Dielman, Goff and Hardwick all got on the bandwagon together and started playing together and have been doing so for the past four years. Hardwick is injured, and Cory Withrow has replaced him over the past several games. McNeill came in as a rookie right away and made the Pro-Bowl last year and has been playing at a high level ever since.

So, it took a while before the group became a cohesive unit, but have been playing together for several years on a consistent basis, which allowed them to gain chemistry and become better.

topscribe
11-18-2007, 07:35 PM
Shane Olivea, 4th year player.

Mike Goff, 10th year player. (Four with Chargers.)

Nick Hardwick, 4th year player.

Kris Dielman, 5th year player. (Started four years.)

Marcus McNeill, 2nd year player.

So Hardwick, Dielman, Goff and Hardwick all got on the bandwagon together and started playing together and have been doing so for the past four years. Hardwick is injured, and Cory Withrow has replaced him over the past several games. McNeill came in as a rookie right away and made the Pro-Bowl last year and has been playing at a high level ever since.

So, it took a while before the group became a cohesive unit, but have been playing together for several years on a consistent basis, which allowed them to gain chemistry and become better.

Then it's fair to assume that the Chargers' and Broncos' respective situations are not equivalent?

-----

Requiem / The Dagda
11-18-2007, 07:55 PM
Then it's fair to assume that the Chargers' and Broncos' respective situations are not equivalent?

-----

Yeah. They've had a few injuries, but for the most part - this group has been together (the bulk of them) for the past for years. They've had time to get passed their initial struggles and have developed a good chemistry. I'd say your assessment is correct. They have a nice blend of youth and veteran leadership on their line, but that youth and veteran mixture has experience. We just lack it right now. Hopefully we'll gain it. :)

Retired_Member_001
11-19-2007, 11:38 AM
How many are 2nd year players? Had they ever played together before, at
any position? What about the other two players . . . are they playing
injured?

These are honest questions. I'm asking because I don't know.

-----

At least we have guys playing in their natural positions, the Colts had a C at LT, a backup G and a G playing at T. By the way, every Colts offensive lineman who stepped into (that were not usually starters) that game had under 3 years experience.

I understand the Colts offensive line struggled slightly against the Chiefs. Offensive lines do struggle when they have a bunch of inexperienced players, what I am saying is that there would still be problems EVEN if the team had Nalen and Hamilton back. This is why, Lepsis is on his last legs, Hamilton is an average pass blocker, Nalen's snap stance is too low for Cutler, Holland is a complete disgrace and Erik Pears is the next George Foster. Do you see? There would still be problems.

If Shanahan had fixed the offensive line earlier, we could have a dominant offense by now.

Retired_Member_001
11-19-2007, 11:56 AM
Some of us still think your crazy and we don't feel stupid :P ;) .

I won't go over things agin, because top pretty much laid it down perfectly. The Oline has been facing serious obstacles many other teams have not been saddled with. Its a reality of the NFL that your backups will nto play as well as your starters. Theres a reason they arn't the starters after all. I also strongly disagree with your sentiments on HAmilton. Stats don't tell the whole story but he has only allowed 3.75 sakcs in the last three years. That averaging about one sack per year. Last year he was a major reason we had any running game and pass protection at all (him and Nalen after Carlisle slipped in his level of play, Foster sucked, and Lepsis was injured). HAmilton is a solid player and there was a major reason he was the heir apparent to the Center position if NAlen went out before his concussion, he is a smart and capable player.


Ben Hamilton is a great RUN blocker. I over exaggerate how bad I think his pass blocking skills are, mainly because everyone here loves him so much.


Also I believe the Broncos did address Lepsis's difficulties. Theres a reason we drafted a left tackle in the third. Whether he proves worthy of his third round selection remains to be seen, but they obviously were looking to replace him and very very few LT's are able to step up and play in their first season, especially in a complicated scheme like the Broncos.

Name 5 GOOD left tackles, who are currently playing, that were drafted outside of the first round and second round. I know your going to hit me with Lepsis, but think of 4 more. If you can do that then I wont mention another word on the offensive line.


Few teams have the stout Olines that the Colts have, and thats because they are the exception not the rule. I certienly would like to have a line like the Colts but I also believe that sometiems when you have to build WR cores, secondaries, and Dlines lke the Broncos have needed to these past years you may not get the chance to do so. Its not as if the Colts line is built on high draft picks like you prefer. Jeff Saturday was an undrafted rookie FA, Ryan Lilja (RG) was also undrafted, JAke Scott (LG) was a fifth round selection, and Ryan Diem was a fourth round selection. Only the newly drafted ugoh was a high draft pick, and none of the established veteran players were first day grabs, much like the Broncos line. Grabing first day guys doesn't mean you'll be building the great Oline of the future.

However, recently offensive linemen are in bigger demmand.


Also I believe there is a vast difference between pass blocking for a potent passer like Manning who commands enough respect to force defenses to constantly worry about the pass (even without Clark and Harrison) then a second year QB without the same number of big weapons (Henry and Walker). I also felt Manning came under more pressure and had to dance aroudn in the pocket more against the Chargers then he had all season long. If the Colts had to play all season long under such circumstances then I think it would be a fair comparison but one game isn't a really good teller IMO.

Like top, I am pretty pleased how the Broncos Oline ahs performed udner such trying conditions.

Of course Manning had to dance around the pocket more, that's because Manning hardly ever has to dance around the pocket. If you put Manning behind our current offensive line, and then put Cutler behind the Colts offensive line (Cutler keeps Marshall and Graham and Peyton keeps Wayne, Clark and Addai) who do you think would do better?

topscribe
11-19-2007, 01:18 PM
Ben Hamilton is a great RUN blocker. I over exaggerate how bad I think his pass blocking skills are, mainly because everyone here loves him so much.

Yes, I thought you exaggerated Hamilton's deficiency in pass blocking. The
fact he has been a given at LG for a number of years is a testament that
he is a pretty good lineman.



Name 5 GOOD left tackles, who are currently playing, that were drafted outside of the first round and second round. I know your going to hit me with Lepsis, but think of 4 more. If you can do that then I wont mention another word on the offensive line.Name 5 GOOD wide receivers, who are currently playing that were drafted
outside the first and second rounds. (You know, perchance, about whom
I speak?)



Of course Manning had to dance around the pocket more, that's because Manning hardly ever has to dance around the pocket. If you put Manning behind our current offensive line, and then put Cutler behind the Colts offensive line (Cutler keeps Marshall and Graham and Peyton keeps Wayne, Clark and Addai) who do you think would do better?Ummm . . . a nine-year pro against a second-year player? Do you think that
might be apples and oranges? Now, if you compare Manning after nine
games against Cutler after nine games, Cutler has already done better than
Manning, hasn't he?

-----

Requiem / The Dagda
11-19-2007, 01:54 PM
Left tackles have a premium for a reason, and often drafted in the top ten, even top five on a yearly basis. Anyone looking for a franchise tackle is going to draft in the first or second rounds to get them, definitely on the first day. Are there examples of left tackles who can play well if they're not top picks? Certainly, but odds are - the higher you go for a tackle, the better of a prospect they are - and the better chance they can compete on the team and be a stalwart for years to come.

Denver's drafting of Harris was a step in the right direction, and I hope the Broncos seriously consider drafting a tackle in the top two rounds this season with the choices they have to keep Cutler protected. I think we'll get some more picks, but it needs to be done on the first day.

Get Williams from Vanderbilt, he has experience guarding Cutler before, and he did a damn good job. He'll be there in the second.

Retired_Member_001
11-19-2007, 03:06 PM
Name 5 GOOD wide receivers, who are currently playing that were drafted
outside the first and second rounds. (You know, perchance, about whom
I speak?)

-----

These are just of the top of my head:

Hines Ward, Terrell Owens, Steve Smith (Panthers), T.J. Houshmandzadeh and our very own BMarsh. I'd include Rod Smith but I'd consider him retired.


Ummm . . . a nine-year pro against a second-year player? Do you think that
might be apples and oranges? Now, if you compare Manning after nine
games against Cutler after nine games, Cutler has already done better than
Manning, hasn't he?

You misunderstood.

I meant Cutler would be doing just as well as Manning has done this season if Cutler had the Colts offensive line.

eessydo
11-19-2007, 06:12 PM
Left tackles have a premium for a reason, and often drafted in the top ten, even top five on a yearly basis. Anyone looking for a franchise tackle is going to draft in the first or second rounds to get them, definitely on the first day. Are there examples of left tackles who can play well if they're not top picks? Certainly, but odds are - the higher you go for a tackle, the better of a prospect they are - and the better chance they can compete on the team and be a stalwart for years to come.

Tell that to the cardinals after drafting Leonard Davis and Al Davis after he drafted Robert Gallery. I could go on pointing out 3 through 7th rounders that are servicable, but I think you get the point.

While they are a little easier to evaluate and tend to pan out more, you are still rolling dice in the draft regardless of position.

Simple Jaded
11-20-2007, 01:01 AM
I just do not understand the debate.

Are ya'll saying the line isn't terrible? Or are you saying the line is just fine?...."We don't need to improve the line, we've got Chris Myers, Montrae Holland and Eric Pears"....Championship!:rolleyes:

If the Broncos drafted a LT in the 1st round would you be for or against the pick?

omac
11-20-2007, 01:13 AM
I just do not understand the debate.

Are ya'll saying the line isn't terrible? Or are you saying the line is just fine?...."We don't need to improve the line, we've got Chris Myers, Montrae Holland and Eric Pears"....Championship!:rolleyes:

If the Broncos drafted a LT in the 1st round would you be for or against the pick?

Against if they picked an LT over a really good DT. Priorities.

BigBroncLove
11-20-2007, 01:59 AM
Name 5 GOOD left tackles, who are currently playing, that were drafted outside of the first round and second round. I know your going to hit me with Lepsis, but think of 4 more. If you can do that then I wont mention another word on the offensive line.

Now I don't understand where this challenge to name good tackles came from. Did I say we made the right decision by drafting Harris? no. Did I say great tackles exist outside of the top two rounds? no. I said the coaching staff obviously addressed the issue of Lepsis's injury and age by drafting a LT. They obviously are worried about it, which was the topic under discussion. Why else draft an LT if your not worried about the position? This challenge IMO is paramount to changing the subject, though truthfully the subject does interest me and when I have time I may infact look into it. However this I do promise you, for everyone of those top LT's taken in the first rounds that turn into franchise LT's, there are two LT's taken in the same rounds in the NFL that prove themselves to be worth the same as third or fourth round players, or arn't even worth that. Look at Gallary :laugh: . I will admit this though, whenever you take a player, any player for any position, lower in the rounds you are taking a bigger chance that they won't turn into a franchise player. However given the needs of the Broncos heading into 2007 I think the first few rounds had much higher need at other positions then at LT this last year.



Of course Manning had to dance around the pocket more, that's because Manning hardly ever has to dance around the pocket. If you put Manning behind our current offensive line, and then put Cutler behind the Colts offensive line (Cutler keeps Marshall and Graham and Peyton keeps Wayne, Clark and Addai) who do you think would do better?

I don't know, I don't deal in massive what if's. What do you think would happen if the movie dog air bud turned to football and became our top reciever, and since there are no rules saying dogs can't play football they'd have to let air bud play? Its a ridiculous question IMO and has zero bearing on reality.

On a side note, VanDer Bosch was completely shut down tonight and the Offensive line did a great job. One game isn't a testament to a unit or a team, but it seems to me things might not be in the "panic button" stage as some believe. Its all a matter of opinion afer all, and as I am entitled to mine you are also equally entitled to yours, but if tonight is a teller at all of the possible potential of this line (Even without HAynesworth in there, to which I was greatly happy to see given what he can do to Olines) things arn't nearly as bad as some (I am not pointing fingers) may believe. Thigns arn't rosy either, don't get me wrong, but its not time to trash this line and revamp IMO, even with all the rookies filling in.

BigBroncLove
11-20-2007, 02:35 AM
Against if they picked an LT over a really good DT. Priorities.

Agreed :beer:

Simple Jaded
11-20-2007, 03:56 AM
Against if they picked an LT over a really good DT. Priorities.

Well I have to say that I agree....But my frustration wouldn't last long knowing that Denver is no longer fooling themselves with this joke of an offensive line......

omac
11-20-2007, 05:51 AM
Well I have to say that I agree....But my frustration wouldn't last long knowing that Denver is no longer fooling themselves with this joke of an offensive line......

I wouldn't call them a joke; they're average to below average, but they're also new, banged-up, and still adjusting. They have been getting better, and they have contributed to the rush offense.