Run Game

[silkamilkamonico]

We heard all offseason about how much better the RB's and run game will be.

Does anyone have any thoughts that the lack of run game is based on our type of offense? If a pass play is called and the linemen get in their stance to pass and then an audible run is called is that hard for a linemen to adjust from a pass blocking stance to a run blocking stance? I don't know anything about the intricate technique's of oline blocking but it seems to me in watching Manning play throughout his career he has never really had even an average run game, other than Edgerrin James. You would think that a dominant passing attack would oppen up the run game but the only RB I can think of that was considered really good was James.

[chazoe60]

We heard all offseason about how much better the RB's and run game will be.

Does anyone have any thoughts that the lack of run game is based on our type of offense? If a pass play is called and the linemen get in their stance to pass and then an audible run is called is that hard for a linemen to adjust from a pass blocking stance to a run blocking stance? I don't know anything about the intricate technique's of oline blocking but it seems to me in watching Manning play throughout his career he has never really had even an average run game, other than Edgerrin James. You would think that a dominant passing attack would oppen up the run game but the only RB I can think of that was considered really good was James.

You put too much of it on the RBs. What is Ball supposed to do when he's wrapped up by three guys behind the LOS? Our OL are very good pass blockers but they suck hind tit at run blocking.

[I Eat Staples]

Our offensive line is one of the best in the NFL at pass blocking, but it just isn't good at run blocking. That's just how they're built, and I assume that the Colts had a similar line because they were also a passing team.

Our offense would be better if we were a spread team 100% of the time and used the run as a changeup. Running from under center in a singleback set on 1st down is almost always a wasted play, and a stretch play is as bad as taking a knee. The Broncos are handicapping the greatest offense of all time by being stubborn and trying to force the run on a team that can't run block, instead of passing 75% of the time and running from the spread as a changeup.

[silkamilkamonico]

You put too much of it on the RBs. What is Ball supposed to do when he's wrapped up by three guys behind the LOS? Our OL are very good pass blockers but they suck hind tit at run blocking.


That's why I mean I am wondering about the blocking. We have a good oline unit. They should be good run blockers. But at the same time look at Manning's offenses throughout his career. His last good running team that I can think of was like in 2005. His teams have struggled running the ball with multiple oline units.

[silkamilkamonico]

Our offensive line is one of the best in the NFL at pass blocking, but it just isn't good at run blocking. That's just how they're built, and I assume that the Colts had a similar line because they were also a passing team.

Our offense would be better if we were a spread team 100% of the time and used the run as a changeup. Running from under center in a singleback set on 1st down is almost always a wasted play, and a stretch play is as bad as taking a knee. The Broncos are handicapping the greatest offense of all time by being stubborn and trying to force the run on a team that can't run block, instead of passing 75% of the time and running from the spread as a changeup.

It should be good at run blocking. They made changes to make sure it was good at run blocking. Clady speaks for himself. Orlando Franklin was a beast at run blocking, and moved inside. Manny stayed in the league long enough to get a look at Denver because he's a good run blocker. Vasquez was part of arguable the best run blocking unit in the NFL for years at SD.

I don't buy this notion that our oline is terrible at run blocking. If they are it's because they are collectively and some coach isn't doing their job. Those are all good individual run blockers.

[tripp]

You guys say our O-line is built for pass blocking, but how come that never stopped Moreno from running 1,000 yards last year? After 3 games, Montee Ball has 165 rushing yards.

And that was without Clady too.

[silkamilkamonico]

You guys say our O-line is built for pass blocking, but how come that never stopped Moreno from running 1,000 yards last year? After 3 games, Montee Ball has 165 rushing yards after 3 games.



Really good point. Moreno turned out to be a pretty damn good back in Denver.

[Dzone]

We should have drafted Lacy instead.

[Simple Jaded]

Oh please, don't use Moreno to wipe your ass with Ball, dude was/is a total and complete waste of of premium pick, didn't do dick until he started getting 6 man boxes in Manning's offense.

If anything Moreno should be the reason you hold out hope for Ball.

[tripp]

Oh please, don't use Moreno to wipe your ass with Ball, dude was/is a total and complete waste of of premium pick, didn't do dick until he started getting 6 man boxes in Manning's offense.

If anything Moreno should be the reason you hold out hope for Ball.

Can't argue with you on the fact that he shouldn't have gone that early in the draft, seeing as how Lesean McCoy was in the same draft year and went in the 2nd round. However, Moreno, regardless of whether he hadn't done Sweet F*** all the previous years, he balled out last year in Manning's offense. What would you suggest the Broncos do regarding the RB position, because nothing is really happening these last 3 games.

[Simple Jaded]

Can't argue with you on the fact that he shouldn't have gone that early in the draft, seeing as how Lesean McCoy was in the same draft year and went in the 2nd round. However, Moreno, regardless of whether he hadn't done Sweet F*** all the previous years, he balled out last year in Manning's offense. What would you suggest the Broncos do regarding the RB position, because nothing is really happening these last 3 games.

Montee Ball will do fine.

[underrated29]

Several things.


Last year was knowshons first 1k season and he just barely hit it. If memory serves correct montee is on pace to get 1k as well. Against a much much much harder schedule.

I don't think it's the Ol being a bad run blocking team. They have blocked for shit no doubt. But the run game has been absolutely pathetic in terms of when we do...95% first down. And how we do....the damn stretch, running sideways bullshit.

Everytime we run down hill right at them. We do good. We get the first down. The big yards, etc. we can't block for the stretch. Power run game we can.



But it's hard to block when everyone knows we are running a draw. Or on first down. When there are 9 in the damn box....and only 1 rb screen is called. But we call the wr bubble screen 11 times. 90% of this is on gase IMO. Ball is more than fine. He is crushing yards after contact. He is balling when he ever gets a whole. It's just so rare he can make it to the LOS without having to deke or break a tackle.


It falls on type of play (stretch), situation (first down, 9 man box), and gase being obvious.

[Simple Jaded]

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/15848/eddie-lacy
Also, I'm not sure Eddie Lacy is the one we should be pining for either.

[Joel]

You put too much of it on the RBs. What is Ball supposed to do when he's wrapped up by three guys behind the LOS? Our OL are very good pass blockers but they suck hind tit at run blocking.
I don't think he put anything on the RBs: He addressed the line and the nature of blocking, merely noting only one RB in Mannings OTHER pass-heavy offense got much notice. I personally dispute that last part; Addai wasn't HoF material, and many of his accolades came from receiving, but he was decent, and put up back-to-back 1000 yd seasons with decent averages his first two seasons (before Indys line collapsed so badly it tanked his numbers and snapped Manning neck.)

They had Tarik Glenn and we have Clady, which I'd call a wash, and maybe Vasquez is on par with Jake Scott or Dylan Gandy—but would anyone ever confuse Ramirez with Jeff Saturday? Or Clark with Ryan Diem? Apart from Clady and Vasquez, our line ain't great, folks, and that's a problem: Manning makes them LOOK great at pass protection because his quick reads and releases get the ball out so fast they seldom have to protect >3-4 seconds. Sadly, they don't have a HoF RB to similarly inflate their performance.

All that means defensive linemen and blitzing LBs don't have to keep one eye on our RBs or honor play-action: They can just spring for Manning knowing even if that handoff IS legit it'll only get 2-3 yds anyway. On the play today where Manning fell over for a 7 yd loss, Simms speculated it was a designed run Manning kept because there was ALREADY A DEFENDER THERE AT THE HANDOFF and a fumble seemed likely. I can't be sure of the playcall, but if that WAS the case, it speaks very poorly of our run blockers.


Really good point. Moreno turned out to be a pretty damn good back in Denver.
Yeah—after he spent 4 years dodging tacklers in the backfield and getting hurt a lot while people complained he went down easy, danced around too much and didn't run with conviction. Sound like anyone we know? When he lost the starting to job to McGahee, McGahee had a banner year running—and led the NFL in yards AFTER CONTACT. Our line's done a crappy job run blocking ever since Shanny left and McDumbass brought in Beadles and Walton (the guy who lost his job to Ramirez last year, and Ramirez isn't a great run blocker; he DOUBLE TEAMS well, but was awful in relief of Kuper at RG in 2012.)

Most guys do some things better than others, 'cause linemen have strengths and weaknesses like everyone else. Clady's the only guy who truly excels at run AND pass blocking. However, a good lineman is at least passable at both. Vasquez, for example, is an okay run blocker—he's just a MUCH better pass blocker. The rest... Franklin was a road grader with poor agility at RT, but he's only slightly better (if any) at LG, where his road-grading should be lethal, especially with Clady locking down the outside. Clark was similar at LT (which is scary, because now he's a RT) but doesn't get push against bigger LDEs.

I'm hoping against hope it's just time and the reshuffle: ALL our linemen are playing beside someone new (in Franklins case, on BOTH sides, at a spot he hasn't played since college.) Line's more than perhaps any unit must function AS a unit. Defensive linemen and LBs just need to get around the edge and/or find/create a hole to exploit—ANYWHERE. That's good news for them, but bad news for the offensive line: They must PREVENT a hole ANYWHERE, while also sealing those edges. If everyone else does his job perfectly but just ONE guy blows it: Busted play.

So they must all work together, and everyone needs to know what to expect from his partners, what weaknesses to compensate for and strengths to rely on, which changed when our lineup changed. Clady doesn't need help, but Franklin often does, and will have double teams to work with Ramirez, who's used to working them with Beadles. Left guards pull to lead block a lot, too, and Franklins slow feet (one argument for moving him from RT) are a liability there. So far, Clark's not been as good pushing back LDEs as he was preventing RDEs from pushing HIM back (so they went around him instead.)

There's a lot of talk every year about offensive lines "gelling" after injuries and FA alters them; I'm hoping ours gels over the bye. It's not as simple as line's being ONLY able to run OR pass block; it's not like our excellent run blockers in the late nineties and early aughts got Elway, Griese and Plummer killed. Somethin' gotta give though, because one-dimensional offense is death, hence SUCCESSFUL offenses have lines that can run AND pass block: That's practically the definiton of a successful offense.

[silkamilkamonico]

Oh please, don't use Moreno to wipe your ass with Ball, dude was/is a total and complete waste of of premium pick, didn't do dick until he started getting 6 man boxes in Manning's offense.

If anything Moreno should be the reason you hold out hope for Ball.

I just can't believe we drafted Ball 46 spots later than Moreno. For as bad as that pick looked, Ball looks like the same back as CJ Anderson, who went undrafted. Ball is still young though so hopefully he gets it together.


Besides, the 1,000k rusher isn't even an achievement. It's 65 yards a game. If you're breaking 1,000k by veraging 3.5 yards per game and can't grind out the clock when you need too because you can't run effectively, that'sjust not a good run game.

[Joel]

Oh please, don't use Moreno to wipe your ass with Ball, dude was/is a total and complete waste of of premium pick, didn't do dick until he started getting 6 man boxes in Manning's offense.

If anything Moreno should be the reason you hold out hope for Ball.
Because defenses suddenly went back to stacking 8 in the box vs. Ball? Not yet, so the question stands: Why was Moreno averaging close to 5 yds against the same 6 man boxes barely allowing Ball 3?

[silkamilkamonico]

I wish we'd get to see CJ Anderson more. I don't get that one. It's almost as mysterious as to why Derek Wolfe still starts over Malik Jackson.

[FanInAZ]

What do the Chargers have that the Broncos don't, a FB. In fact, if you look at all of the top rushing teams, they use FBs from time to time. Pounding your opponents' LBs & DBs with FBs is the best way to ware them down.

[Joel]

According to ESPN,
Marshawn Lynch (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/10456/marshawn-lynch) had three times as many rush yards before contact as Broncos running backs did Sunday. The trio of Montee Ball (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/15823/montee-ball), Ronnie Hillman (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/14895/ronnie-hillman) and C.J. Anderson (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/16040/cj-anderson) were first contacted behind the line of scrimmage on nine of their 20 combined rushes, including six straight at one point in the first half. Lynch was first hit behind the line on five of his 26 rushes.
I doubt swapping RBs alters that; it's not like they ran around in circles waiting for excellent run blockers to let 3 tacklers through: They didn't HAVE to wait. Seriously, Manning fell down on a 7 yd "sack" on a play Simms claimed was a handoff aborted because of a Seahawk ALREADY on top of him and Ball to force a fumble: Would Anderson, Thompson or Barry freakin' Sanders change that?

[Hawgdriver]

According to ESPN, Marshawn Lynch had three times as many rush yards before contact as Broncos running backs did Sunday. The trio of Montee Ball, Ronnie Hillman and C.J. Anderson were first contacted behind the line of scrimmage on nine of their 20 combined rushes, including six straight at one point in the first half.

Damn. That ain't good.

[VonDoom]

Our offensive line is one of the best in the NFL at pass blocking, but it just isn't good at run blocking. That's just how they're built, and I assume that the Colts had a similar line because they were also a passing team.

Our offense would be better if we were a spread team 100% of the time and used the run as a changeup. Running from under center in a singleback set on 1st down is almost always a wasted play, and a stretch play is as bad as taking a knee. The Broncos are handicapping the greatest offense of all time by being stubborn and trying to force the run on a team that can't run block, instead of passing 75% of the time and running from the spread as a changeup.

This is a good point, and one I didn't think of until now. We've been using the two TE sets a lot more this year, and I wonder if that effects the way we run the ball. If we're in typical "running downs" this year, maybe it's easier for defenses to key on the run. That would go back to play calling, which I'm thinking is the biggest issue we have in general.


It should be good at run blocking. They made changes to make sure it was good at run blocking. Clady speaks for himself. Orlando Franklin was a beast at run blocking, and moved inside. Manny stayed in the league long enough to get a look at Denver because he's a good run blocker. Vasquez was part of arguable the best run blocking unit in the NFL for years at SD.

I don't buy this notion that our oline is terrible at run blocking. If they are it's because they are collectively and some coach isn't doing their job. Those are all good individual run blockers.

Yeah, I thought Franklin was moved inside to a be a road grader. Maybe he just needs more time there, but we're getting destroyed behind the line on almost every running play.


I just can't believe we drafted Ball 46 spots later than Moreno. For as bad as that pick looked, Ball looks like the same back as CJ Anderson, who went undrafted. Ball is still young though so hopefully he gets it together.


Besides, the 1,000k rusher isn't even an achievement. It's 65 yards a game. If you're breaking 1,000k by veraging 3.5 yards per game and can't grind out the clock when you need too because you can't run effectively, that'sjust not a good run game.

Yeah, as a "feature back", Ball is right now on pace to get 261 carries for 880 yards. That's pedestrian in today's NFL.

I went back and looked at the first three games from last year vs the first three games this year in terms of our run game. I only noted runs from our RB's, so the Sanders end arounds aren't here, but take a look at this:

2013 (1st three games):
Moreno - 34 carries, 160 yards, 4.7 ypc
Ball - 31 carries, 99 yards, 3.2 ypc
Hillman - 14 carries, 84 yards, 6.0 ypc (anyone remember this? I certainly didn't)
Totals - 79 carries, 343 yards, 4.3 ypc

2014 (1st three games):
Ball - 49 carries, 165 yards, 3.4 ypc
Anderson - 11 carries, 55 yards, 5.0 ypc (includes 2 carries for (-3) yards yesterday)
Hillman - 2 carries, 2 yards, 1.0 ypc (both from yesterday)
Totals - 62 carries, 222 yards, 3.6 ypc

What sticks out to me is that we were a more balanced attack last year at this point. Moreno had 43% of our carries, Ball 39% and Hillman 18%. This year Ball has had 79% of our carries, Anderson 18% and Hillman 3%. Maybe we're trying too hard to get Ball to be the man this year. I'd like to see more of Anderson (which I said last week) and even some Juwan Thompson. If the OL or the coaching are our bigger problems, though, it might not matter who gets the touches.

[BroncoNut]

Montee Ball will do fine.

he's more than adequate, I like him. as for the thread, yeah, something's lacking in the run scheme and I am like wtf? it affects the passing game too and wears down our defense with too little time of possession. regardless of the record, and yesterdays pretty neat comeback, I am not too excited about this team this year. too unbalanced and finesse reliant

[RyanC]

I think we ran on nearly every first down in that game, at least the first 3 quarters. It would be nice if we had that 97/98 type of 2nd and 4 offense, but we don't. OTOH we have maybe one of the best passing offenses of all time. IMO 50/50 rush/pass would show a commitment to the run. 90/10 (or whatever the actual percentage was) when you have PFM behind center and our receiving core is abject stupidity, no matter what D is out there.

[tripp]

Isn't Montee Ball, Ronnie Hillman, and CJ Anderson, in theory, the same type of RB? Why aren't we using Thompson who will run with conviction and power? I don't think any team is intimidated by Montee Ball.

[Ziggy]

The Oline isn't run blocking well, but Ball isn't waiting on his blocks well either. The kid has no patience, but I think it will come with time and film study.

[Buff]

My problem with Moreno during his first few years was his vision. He seemed to have terrible instincts.

My problem with Ball is that he's just too slow. He seems to have decent enough instincts but he's just not getting to and through the holes fast enough. I think after yesterday we have to start acknowledging that he's just not where we need him to be yet.

I also think it's a scheme problem. We are such a pass heavy team that it doesn't feel natural for anybody when we're running out of a 2 TE set with Peyton under center. We can't seem to run effectively out of our passing formations, and we can't pass effectively out of our running formations, so we become sort of one dimensional and easier to defense.

[D1g1tal j1m]

It is well acknowledged that Ball is slow to the hole and doesn't have that extra gear. With no threat of him making huge runs on any given play, the Defense can just flow to him easily for a short gain. I like Ball but I don't see him as a lead RB, more of a bruising and goaline back. We are stuck with Ball right now due to our commitment during the offseason and preseason of declaring Ball as our lead runner, but if his pedestrian performances continue I sense they will start moving away from him.

[artie_dale]

What do the Chargers have that the Broncos don't, a FB. In fact, if you look at all of the top rushing teams, they use FBs from time to time. Pounding your opponents' LBs & DBs with FBs is the best way to ware them down.

Actually, the reason the Chargers ran effectively was because they spread the ball out, forcing Seattle to put less in the box and look for pass first. I thought our Broncos coaching staff was smarter than they were yesterday and were going to apply something similar to that. But, nope. They ran with two TEs every time and it made it easy for Seattle and their very talended defensive players to stack the box. When I saw that and even the commentary knew Denver was going to use a lot of two TE formations, I knew our run game wouldn't be a factor at all. Smh at the coaching.

[Buff]

Actually, the reason the Chargers ran effectively was because they spread the ball out, forcing Seattle to put less in the box and look for pass first. I thought our Broncos coaching staff was smarter than they were yesterday and were going to apply something similar to that. But, nope. They ran with two TEs every time and it made it easy for Seattle and their very talended defensive players to stack the box. When I saw that and even the commentary knew Denver was going to use a lot of two TE formations, I knew our run game wouldn't be a factor at all. Smh at the coaching.

This is what I was alluding to above. The two TE sets make us too predictable - we aren't enough of a passing threat in that formation, and we don't have the talent at RB to strike fear into the defense in that alignment. Plus Manning isn't a threat to get out on the edges, so it just turns us into a one dimensional offense.

That said - I think we have to acknowledge that we tried to open it up in the Super Bowl and we just got destroyed by a superior defense. So I don't hate yesterday's gameplan so much as I hate the execution with our personnel.

[DenBronx]

We should have drafted Lacy instead.

He's not having a good year.

From NBC Sports Talk for Android:

Eddie Lacy looking for answers to run game woes
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/09/22/eddie-lacy-looking-for-answers-to-run-game-woes/

[BigDaddyBronco]

Our interior line is a friggen sieve in the run game. I'm not sure which one is failing or if all of them or failing. But you could see it on multiple occasions where the Seahawks had increddible penetration and Ball was fighting to get to the line of scrimmage. We might need a FB, having Virgil Green get hurt didn't help the run game.

[Buff]

Our interior line is a friggen sieve in the run game. I'm not sure which one is failing or if all of them or failing. But you could see it on multiple occasions where the Seahawks had increddible penetration and Ball was fighting to get to the line of scrimmage. We might need a FB, having Virgil Green get hurt didn't help the run game.

Peyton said after the game that he felt like the gameplan got blown up once Virgil Green got knocked out. Who knew he was so vital to our success?

As artie and I were discussing, I don't think the scheme did our o-line any favors. It almost felt like a McDaniels offense with our formations tipping our playcalling.

[DenBronx]

Kinda looked like the game plan got better in the 2nd half. Maybe they made adjustments with Tamme and Thomas???

[Hawgdriver]

Peyton said after the game that he felt like the gameplan got blown up once Virgil Green got knocked out. Who knew he was so vital to our success?

I could see that, but it's surprising. I mean, replace all those damn bubble screens with 2 TE innovation, different game.

[MOtorboat]

I don't know what they think they saw, but abandoning the power after three or four runs was a mistake. Yes, Ball fumbled on a power, but he also gained seven yards.

But to switch from that to the stretch and the draw the rest of the game was a mistake against that defense. I'd like to see them go back to that power. A.) Because Ball knows the power the best and B.) Because if I think if they stick with it, it will work.

[CCMO]

When you have a passing quarterback that must be protected at all costs, you get lineman who are good at pass blocking. Therefore, you do not have all pro lineman that run block well....

Always a price to pay, that is the nature of the sport. Are you suggesting we get lineman that are run blockers? Few, lineman if any, can play well on both runs and passes, at least not when you are talking about the top 3-4 teams in the NFL!

[Valar Morghulis]

i think we should use the run, solely to keep defences honest rather than trying to establish ourselves as a team who runs the ball - just throw it, let the rbs pass block and pick up yardage on the occasion dump off, screen or run plays in short yardage situations.

[CCMO]

i think we should use the run, solely to keep defences honest rather than trying to establish ourselves as a team who runs the ball - just throw it, let the rbs pass block and pick up yardage on the occasion dump off, screen or run plays in short yardage situations.

That is in fact exactly what they did....and what they do most of the time.....with a few exceptions!

[Valar Morghulis]

I think that is exactly what we did last year.

I think that is exactly what we should do again.

I just feel that they are forcing the run sometimes this year because they want to set a different tone to that of the team that got blew out in the superbowl

[underrated29]

I don't know what they think they saw, but abandoning the power after three or four runs was a mistake. Yes, Ball fumbled on a power, but he also gained seven yards.

But to switch from that to the stretch and the draw the rest of the game was a mistake against that defense. I'd like to see them go back to that power. A.) Because Ball knows the power the best and B.) Because if I think if they stick with it, it will work.




I could not agree with this more!!! I feel like I have been saying it since pre-season too. Its jsut so bizzare. With mccoy all we ever did was run right up the middle and it never worked. Now all we do is run sideways and it never works. With mccoy when we did run sideways it worked and with gase when we do run power up the middle it does work. How do they not see this?!!! Its about as obvious as a gay man in a nudist colony. Furthermore, id say 90% of all those runs have either been first downs or Big Gainers of 6+ yards....by CJ or ball or anyone. Ball works best when running down hill anyway. Sure, we should throw in a toss/pitch, a sweep or two. But majority needs to be down hill running. ESPECIALLY against the hawks. The hawks defense is based on speed. They do not like to be run right at. When the packers ran it down their throats, right at them, they had success. The bolts did the same thing. We had success when we did it. Dictate the play, dictate the power, dictate the hole, run them the eff over, Gase!!




When you have a passing quarterback that must be protected at all costs, you get lineman who are good at pass blocking. Therefore, you do not have all pro lineman that run block well....

Always a price to pay, that is the nature of the sport. Are you suggesting we get lineman that are run blockers? Few, lineman if any, can play well on both runs and passes, at least not when you are talking about the top 3-4 teams in the NFL!



I do not think I agree with this at all. i think this is fan speak.

Tom brady and the pats are good at run blocking (well, until they traded away all their OL that is)- they run the ball well. Have for years.
Drew brees and the saints are good at run blocking. They are running the ball really well.
The texans
The bears.

Some teams though do follow what you say. The lions arent that good at running. The colts are average. The dolphins. to name a few

[G_Money]

I don't know what they think they saw, but abandoning the power after three or four runs was a mistake. Yes, Ball fumbled on a power, but he also gained seven yards.

But to switch from that to the stretch and the draw the rest of the game was a mistake against that defense. I'd like to see them go back to that power. A.) Because Ball knows the power the best and B.) Because if I think if they stick with it, it will work.

We are not the cut/chop blocking dynamo that the late 90s team was. THAT team might be able to run a stretch against the Seahawks, because they'd be worried about their knees in pursuit. We didn't move Franklin inside and keep "I can bench 650 pounds" Man-Ram at center to run the stretch. Go get Ben Garland or somebody, line em up at fullback, and bust heads. San Fran ain't as staunch as they were but Ball doesn't have the feet or the vision to be stretching out to the sideline. He's also not an explosive back to catch em by surprise in the draw.

If you want two yards, dump the ball off in a pass at the LOS. Otherwise, I agree: no more of this stretch or draw nonsense against NFCW teams. Not without some significant alterations in approach.

[Joel]

Actually, the reason the Chargers ran effectively was because they spread the ball out, forcing Seattle to put less in the box and look for pass first. I thought our Broncos coaching staff was smarter than they were yesterday and were going to apply something similar to that. But, nope. They ran with two TEs every time and it made it easy for Seattle and their very talended defensive players to stack the box. When I saw that and even the commentary knew Denver was going to use a lot of two TE formations, I knew our run game wouldn't be a factor at all. Smh at the coaching.
I need to look at the play-by-play of that game, because the stat line says SD did NOT run effectively: They averaged 2.7/carry—but they did it 37 freakin' times! And got in 28 passes on top of that to "expose" Seattles secondary. It may come down to an argument against "bend but don't break" for ball control: While SD was running 65 offensive plays, Seattle only managed 38; spread over 10 drives, that ain't a lot of first downs. Looking at the drive chart, Seattle got NO first downs on 6/10 drives, and two more ended after just 5 plays.

It's far easier to get away with no-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust if the other offense can't move the ball either. I know one thing: I'm not eager to face SDs D twice....

[VonDoom]

I need to look at the play-by-play of that game, because the stat line says SD did NOT run effectively: They averaged 2.7/carry—but they did it 37 freakin' times! And got in 28 passes on top of that to "expose" Seattles secondary. It may come down to an argument against "bend but don't break" for ball control: While SD was running 65 offensive plays, Seattle only managed 38; spread over 10 drives, that ain't a lot of first downs. Looking at the drive chart, Seattle got NO first downs on 6/10 drives, and two more ended after just 5 plays.

It's far easier to get away with no-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust if the other offense can't move the ball either. I know one thing: I'm not eager to face SDs D twice....

It's funny, because I was just coming in here to post something on SD. I haven't watched them too much this year so far, but I was under the impression that they were able to control the clock so much because they can run effectively. I was wrong - they are LAST in the league in ypc, at a putrid 2.4. They've also fumbled four times and lost ZERO, so luck has to be a factor here somewhere.

So how do they do it? I'm actually asking here. In looking at some stats, I'd say their defense has been quite good so far - they're only giving up 16.3 ppg (tied for fourth in the league) and 327.7 ypg (10th). We've given up 22.3 ppg (15th ) and 390.7 ypg (a terrible 30th so far). Our offensive statistics are pretty similar at this point - SD is 13th in scoring at 23 ppg, and we are 9th at 25 ppg. We're 17th in ypg at 339.3 and SD is 19th at 334.3

[NightTerror218]

IMO our offense should not come into a fame thinking we are going to run ball more. They should come in and pass the ball and get the LB into coverage and then run. Delayed handoffs worked well with Moreno and before him McGhee. Why do I see none of those now?

[NightTerror218]

I need to look at the play-by-play of that game, because the stat line says SD did NOT run effectively: They averaged 2.7/carry—but they did it 37 freakin' times! And got in 28 passes on top of that to "expose" Seattles secondary. It may come down to an argument against "bend but don't break" for ball control: While SD was running 65 offensive plays, Seattle only managed 38; spread over 10 drives, that ain't a lot of first downs. Looking at the drive chart, Seattle got NO first downs on 6/10 drives, and two more ended after just 5 plays.

It's far easier to get away with no-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust if the other offense can't move the ball either. I know one thing: I'm not eager to face SDs D twice....

SD did a lot of stretch plays with WRs and that left middle open for small underneath passes to RBs. That was how they moved ball in chunks. Took what Seattle game them.

[Joel]

It's funny, because I was just coming in here to post something on SD. I haven't watched them too much this year so far, but I was under the impression that they were able to control the clock so much because they can run effectively. I was wrong - they are LAST in the league in ypc, at a putrid 2.4. They've also fumbled four times and lost ZERO, so luck has to be a factor here somewhere.

So how do they do it? I'm actually asking here. In looking at some stats, I'd say their defense has been quite good so far - they're only giving up 16.3 ppg (tied for fourth in the league) and 327.7 ypg (10th). We've given up 22.3 ppg (15th ) and 390.7 ypg (a terrible 30th so far). Our offensive statistics are pretty similar at this point - SD is 13th in scoring at 23 ppg, and we are 9th at 25 ppg. We're 17th in ypg at 339.3 and SD is 19th at 334.3
Gotta look at that play-by-play, but I'll probably wait till tomorrow. Right now I'm zoned in on SD running 65 offensive plays to Seattles 38; SD only had one less run than Seattle had PLAYS. That's either a lot of great ball control offense, or outstanding "don't bend OR break" D; given SD averaged 2.7 on the ground but Seattle only got first downs on 4/10 drives (and only got MULTIPLE first downs on TWO) I'm inclined to think the D is back in San Diego. That means our offense better get over its existential crisis FAST; right now, SD's TECHNICALLY alone in first place in the AFCW.

[I Eat Staples]

It's funny, because I was just coming in here to post something on SD. I haven't watched them too much this year so far, but I was under the impression that they were able to control the clock so much because they can run effectively. I was wrong - they are LAST in the league in ypc, at a putrid 2.4. They've also fumbled four times and lost ZERO, so luck has to be a factor here somewhere.

So how do they do it? I'm actually asking here. In looking at some stats, I'd say their defense has been quite good so far - they're only giving up 16.3 ppg (tied for fourth in the league) and 327.7 ypg (10th). We've given up 22.3 ppg (15th ) and 390.7 ypg (a terrible 30th so far). Our offensive statistics are pretty similar at this point - SD is 13th in scoring at 23 ppg, and we are 9th at 25 ppg. We're 17th in ypg at 339.3 and SD is 19th at 334.3

They convert 3rd downs and Rivers has a good completion percentage. The way you control the clock is by converting 3rd downs and not throwing incomplete passes, like the Chiefs did to us in the 2nd half of that game. Running the ball is not that important in the NFL anymore.

[MOtorboat]

Gotta look at that play-by-play, but I'll probably wait till tomorrow. Right now I'm zoned in on SD running 65 offensive plays to Seattles 38; SD only had one less run than Seattle had PLAYS. That's either a lot of great ball control offense, or outstanding "don't bend OR break" D; given SD averaged 2.7 on the ground but Seattle only got first downs on 4/10 drives (and only got MULTIPLE first downs on TWO) I'm inclined to think the D is back in San Diego. That means our offense better get over its existential crisis FAST; right now, SD's TECHNICALLY alone in first place in the AFCW.

You'd learn a lot more by watching a replay of the game.

[Joel]

They convert 3rd downs and Rivers has a good completion percentage. The way you control the clock is by converting 3rd downs and not throwing incomplete passes, like the Chiefs did to us in the 2nd half of that game. Running the ball is not that important in the NFL anymore.
Good to know; anyone told those Chiefs last week, or Lynch? We sold out on stopping him—so passes burned us; we sold out on stopping passes—so Lynch burned us. That OT drive was a classic example of what an offense that's NOT one-dimensional can do to even great defenses by keeping them guessing; we never knew WHAT was coming on ANY down, so they marched straight to our end zone.

Best way to avoid throwing an incomplete pass is to NOT throw, because even a great QB who completes 70% stops the clock 30% more than a RUN. It's the best way to avoid turnovers, too, since interceptions are about 3X as common as fumbles; a QB who throws 6 Ints/yr goes to the Pro Bowl, but a RB with 6 fumbles goes to the waiver wire. Since when does converting 3rd down automatically mean passing? When Seattle has 3rd and 3, do they always pass? Always run? I haven't looked, but would bet it's about 50/50: That's why they're champions, and we're making excuses.

[Joel]

You'd learn a lot more by watching a replay of the game.
Undoubtedly, but that's not an option, unless you're offering a free online stream link. Play-by-play's the best I can do.

[Valar Morghulis]

Well we can probably pick up AP in free agency soon enough, that should solve the problem

[Slick]

Phyllis does a good job of buying time. He rarely takes a sack from outside pressure.

[Joel]

Well we can probably pick up AP in free agency soon enough, that should solve the problem
This thought has repeatedly occurred to me, especially since unnamed Vikings execs were qouted saying they see no future for him on the team. It sounds like the League's gonna throw him out for (at least) the rest of the year though, so it'll probably have to wait till next season. Maybe we can trade Franklin or Clark for him; everyone knows Minnesota loves blindingly stupid trades.

[FanInAZ]

Actually, the reason the Chargers ran effectively was because they spread the ball out, forcing Seattle to put less in the box and look for pass first. I thought our Broncos coaching staff was smarter than they were yesterday and were going to apply something similar to that. But, nope. They ran with two TEs every time and it made it easy for Seattle and their very talended defensive players to stack the box. When I saw that and even the commentary knew Denver was going to use a lot of two TE formations, I knew our run game wouldn't be a factor at all. Smh at the coaching.

Just double check my facts using NFL replay. The Chargers ran the ball 8 times with a FB, twice in the fist quarter, but didn't rush again with a FB until the last rush of the 3rd. The 1st 6 were with Matthews (gaining: 3, 2, 6, 6, 5 & 3), the last 2 by Brown.(gaining 1 & 0). Yes, they ran more out of the shotgun, but that's only because I don't think Rivers ever throws the ball except from the shotgun. Nevertheless, you want to see a consistently effective run game against the Seahawks? Get NFL rewind & look what Matthews did with a FB compare what he did without.

[BroncoJoe]

SD did a lot of stretch plays with WRs and that left middle open for small underneath passes to RBs. That was how they moved ball in chunks. Took what Seattle game them.

Lots of underneath routes. And, the temperature was 115 on the field.

[VonDoom]

Good to know; anyone told those Chiefs last week, or Lynch? We sold out on stopping him—so passes burned us; we sold out on stopping passes—so Lynch burned us. That OT drive was a classic example of what an offense that's NOT one-dimensional can do to even great defenses by keeping them guessing; we never knew WHAT was coming on ANY down, so they marched straight to our end zone.

Honestly, the only failure on defense in OT was not stopping Wilson, and that's mostly because he's very good, and very clutch. Yes, they mixed it up nicely and moved it on us, but twice he had to convert third down runs when no better option presented itself. Those were bigger back breakers than anything else I saw. I believe the 'Hawks were only 2 for 8 on third downs in the second half, but 2 for 2 in OT.

[TXBRONC]

It should be good at run blocking. They made changes to make sure it was good at run blocking. Clady speaks for himself. Orlando Franklin was a beast at run blocking, and moved inside. Manny stayed in the league long enough to get a look at Denver because he's a good run blocker. Vasquez was part of arguable the best run blocking unit in the NFL for years at SD.

I don't buy this notion that our oline is terrible at run blocking. If they are it's because they are collectively and some coach isn't doing their job. Those are all good individual run blockers.

You know that without that 224 yard rushing performance against the Patriots there is very real chance he never gets to 1,000 rushing.

[MOtorboat]

You know that without that 224 yard rushing performance against the Patriots there is very real chance he never gets to 1,000 rushing.

Except that happened.

[Joel]

Except that happened.
It's a fair point though; half NEs front seven was gone for that game, so it was held together with bandaids and prayers against us. Then again, when Moreno got tired (and then got hurt,) Hillman and Anderson did NOTHING against that same half-strength front seven; doesn't exactly inspire confidence in them now.

[Joel]

Honestly, the only failure on defense in OT was not stopping Wilson, and that's mostly because he's very good, and very clutch. Yes, they mixed it up nicely and moved it on us, but twice he had to convert third down runs when no better option presented itself. Those were bigger back breakers than anything else I saw. I believe the 'Hawks were only 2 for 8 on third downs in the second half, but 2 for 2 in OT.
Also a fair point, but Lynch had several nice runs (including the game-winner) to avoid 3rd and long situations entirely, while their receivers had several nice catches. It's hard to smother the run and pass simultaneously without running the ol' 4-4-4 D. That's why we were lethal with Elway, Eddie Mac, Rod and Sharpe complemented by Davis, Griffith and our ZBS line, and would be now if we had ANY run game to help Manning similarly. It doesn't have to be elite like Davis and the ZBS; he won his SB Ring with Addai after James moved on for more money—but it must be SOMETHING.

[DenBronx]

This thought has repeatedly occurred to me, especially since unnamed Vikings execs were qouted saying they see no future for him on the team. It sounds like the League's gonna throw him out for (at least) the rest of the year though, so it'll probably have to wait till next season. Maybe we can trade Franklin or Clark for him; everyone knows Minnesota loves blindingly stupid trades.



It would probably take Franklin AND Ball...plus a draft choice.

[Joel]

It would probably take Franklin AND Ball...plus a draft choice.
Which round? If Minnesota's serious about dumping him—with 4 years and ~$30 million left on his contract—it may be a case of "get what you can so you don't have to release him and get NOTHING." That $30 million's my guesstimate (via Rotoworld) of his remaining contract AFTER Minnesota eats the rest of his signing bonus, btw; the difference between that and the paltry sums we're paying Ball and Franklin (whom we're not paying ANYTHING after this year) must be a factor in any potential trade deal.

Not that I really expect one, because it's the same old deal: Anyone good enough and un-suspended enough to motivate a trade commands so much compensation it's impractical; anyone declining, injured or otherwise tainted badly enough the team will let him go cheap isn't worth trading for in the first place.

[MOtorboat]

So the solution is to trade for a guy who might sit the whole season?

Well, that's a productive thought.

Nevermind that Peterson doesn't fit this offense and Denver doesn't run that offense. Then there's the money aspect...

I have played Madden this afternoon though.

[Joel]

So the solution is to trade for a guy who might sit the whole season?
I doubt we (or anyone) will offer/accept a trade while he's still in limbo, but that may put the kibosh on the whole thing for this year anyway, 'cause I doubt his legal case's resolved by the trade deadline.

I wouldn't mind him in the offseason though (even if I think it's only marginally more likely then.)


Nevermind that Peterson doesn't fit this offense and Denver doesn't run that offense. Then there's the money aspect...
Dude's a HoF back who has Sanderesque elusiveness with Emmitt Smith-like power for extra yards and goal line penetration: How does he NOT fit ANY offense? Crappy pass blocker or something? He's a pretty darned good receiving back. All that said, I'm pretty sure you're absolutely right on the money aspect; we've got tons of great players in the last year of rookie contracts, so it's already almost a given we lose several next year, and most of Petersons contract for the next 4 years would come with him, so it's hard to see him in our budget.


I have played Madden this afternoon though.
Which, again, is pretty much where the fantasy belongs, but I can't deny it's a NICE fantasy; Manning AND Peterson, with the Thomases, Welker and Sanders? UNSTOPPABLE JUGGERNAUT. He's not QUITE as elusive as Sanders or powerful as Smith, but not far behind either; he's probably the only back in todays league who could make our awful run blocking effective.

[TXBRONC]

Except that happened.

You missed the point MO.

[silkamilkamonico]

Adrian Peterson wouldn't average more than 4 yards in our offense.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

Adrian Peterson wouldn't average more than 4 yards in our offense.

He wouldn't put up with this nonsense. He'd take a switch to Manning.

[Valar Morghulis]

He wouldn't put up with this nonsense. He'd take a switch to Manning.

a thousand high fives to you sir!

[echobravo]

I am a fan of running the ball. Pound it at em and make em stop you. Sadly that is surprisingly easy with this offense. I cringe when I see them line up in the one back. Commentators are always talking about how high flying and aggressive our passing game is. True, but if you squint you can see the ghosts of the run and shoot, the fun gun, and the K gun. A fullback would add to our YPC. Especially if we could find one with a nasty de-cleating streak in them.

Call me old fashioned if you like, but a lead blocker adds to your running game. Factor in the Thomas boys and Sanders, look out... Would you rather have a slow death or a quick death. These modern over scheming offenses telegraph way too much to the defense, BTW the last time the Broncos had a successful draw play attack was with Steve Sewell.

[CrazyHorse]

I am a fan of running the ball. Pound it at em and make em stop you. Sadly that is surprisingly easy with this offense. I cringe when I see them line up in the one back. Commentators are always talking about how high flying and aggressive our passing game is. True, but if you squint you can see the ghosts of the run and shoot, the fun gun, and the K gun. A fullback would add to our YPC. Especially if we could find one with a nasty de-cleating streak in them.

Call me old fashioned if you like, but a lead blocker adds to your running game. Factor in the Thomas boys and Sanders, look out... Would you rather have a slow death or a quick death. These modern over scheming offenses telegraph way too much to the defense, BTW the last time the Broncos had a successful draw play attack was with Steve Sewell.

Isn't Virgil Green used as a fullback?

[Joel]

Isn't Virgil Green used as a fullback?
Meh; Run 'n Shoot with ONE blocking TE and no FB isn't much different than Run 'n Shoot with a FB and NO TE. This offense is supposed to be historys best, but can't survive the loss of Virgil Green...?

[MOtorboat]

Meh; Run 'n Shoot with ONE blocking TE and no FB isn't much different than Run 'n Shoot with a FB and NO TE. This offense is supposed to be historys best, but can't survive the loss of Virgil Green...?

String 'em up, right Joel?

Of course, this is priceless, considering you spent a massive amount of words on trying to prove why the offense needed to play Joel Dreesen instead of Julius Thomas.

Moving the bar...

The Broncos did EXACTLY WHAT YOU WANTED and then you change your criteria for what you want in order to bitch and spam the board.

Another example: moving Franklin to guard. You bitched and moaned about it for months, and then it happened and you now criticize the Broncos for the offensive line run blocking when they did EXACTLY WHAT YOU WANTED.

[Joel]

String 'em up, right Joel?

Of course, this is priceless, considering you spent a massive amount of words on trying to prove why the offense needed to play Joel Dreesen instead of Julius Thomas.

Moving the bar...

The Broncos did EXACTLY WHAT YOU WANTED and then you change your criteria for what you want in order to bitch and spam the board.
Selective memory: I advocated more Green then, too; while both are good blockers, Dreesen WAS the better receiver, but since Green's made some nice catches the last two games I'm thrilled to see him.

But c'mon: Historys best offense stands or falls on VIRGIL GREEN?! That's just not true—or if it is, we've done something HORRIBLY WRONG.


Another example: moving Franklin to guard. You bitched and moaned about it for months, and then it happened and you now criticize the Broncos for the offensive line run blocking when they did EXACTLY WHAT YOU WANTED.
Hey, I just took up the cry after OTHERS STARTED it, and not because Franklin's an elite guard, only because he's an AWFUL tackle whose sole strength IS strength and it was starkly clear we'll never bring in any REAL guard beside Vasquez. Yet so far, Franklin's not showing he's any better at LG than RT; maybe his slow feet don't let him pull like Beadles (ALL Beadles did well,) or maybe he just can't hack it.

The reality is 90% of my complaints are about our pitiful run "blocking" getting ALL our RBs killed behind the LoS and forcing them to "make the first, second and third guy miss" to get "extra" yards for a 3 yd average, so if I'm "wrong 90% of the time" so are the Broncos coaches, players and journalists all SAYING THE EXACT SAME THING. Guess Legwold didn't get to be Denvers rep on the HoF committee by viewing everything through glasses so orange-colored they're opaque. But just ignore alll that, keep telling yourself "THE PROGRAM IS ROCK SOLID111" and it'll all be fine.