What is our defensive Philosophy now?

[Fan in Exile]

In his press conference Shanahan said, "We have a philosophy here on defense that I would like to get back to a little bit, and Bob (Slowik) knows that philosophy. So that's why I think he will do a great job."

Does anyone know what he's referring to?

[claymore]

Stop the run.

[BOSSHOGG30]

Light em up, send in the hounds, grit your teeth, and at all cost that QB better be laying on the ground.

[MOtorboat]

Light em up, send in the hounds, grit your teeth, and at all cost that QB better be laying on the ground.

....after we stop the run.

[claymore]

....after we stop the run.
LMAO. Baby steps

[Jwalk - JayCutty6Goes - CasinoRoyal]

Bob is a zone blitzing DC. WHen you look at his track record on all the teams hes been a DC on........None of them finished better than 22nd overall.........This guy sucks so bad, SO lets see Shanny hires the guy who was fired in GB for Bates. Bates goes to Gb and tuns them into a top 10 defense......We hire the guy who was fired for Bates.....GO figure..... This is just another stupid move Shanny is making. You all get ready for another horrible year of defense. Slowick is a proven loser.


http://dack.com/archive/bob-slowik-must-be-fired.html

[BOSSHOGG30]

Slowik is a good DB coach... nothing more. His players said he is a good coach, but that doesn't mean it will transition on game day, as he has proven time and time again. I'm not going to let my hopes get up over this guy at all.

[Italianmobstr7]

Bob is a zone blitzing DC. WHen you look at his track record on all the teams hes been a DC on........None of them finished better than 22nd overall.........This guy sucks so bad, SO lets see Shanny hires the guy who was fired in GB for Bates. Bates goes to Gb and tuns them into a top 10 defense......We hire the guy who was fired for Bates.....GO figure..... This is just another stupid move Shanny is making. You all get ready for another horrible year of defense. Slowick is a proven loser.


http://dack.com/archive/bob-slowik-must-be-fired.html

Slowik is a proven loser, and Bates was a proven winner. What happened in the past means nothing. Slowik might be better here in Denver running the show on D. Maybe we have the talent to run his scheme better than the teams he previously coached. I'm not saying for sure that he won't be bad, but give the guy a chance before you throw him under the bus.

[topscribe]

New defensive philosophy:

Cornerbacks play up to the LOS, mace the WRs as they come off the line.

Safety gets on TE, does the same thing.

LBs all jump on the RB at the same time . . . whether or not he has the ball.

400-lb. defensive linemen, brought in during offseason, throw offensive linemen at the QB.

Meanwhile, cheeleaders do pole dances in their birthday suits for any offensive players the defense might have missed.



Hmmm . . . shaping up to be a pretty good defense . . . :coffee:



-----

[G_Money]

Slowik runs a blitz scheme. Some of it's zone, some of it's edge w/ DBs, but his preferred method of attack is the blitz. He'll do it vs. both the run and the pass. He also lets his linemen stunt far more than we've seen the last coupla years, which will leave running gaps if done at the wrong time.

LB play is absolutely crucial in his defense, both to clean up after failed stunts open running lanes and to get to the QB on delayed blitzes, as well as in pass coverage responsibilities (because a blitzing team is very succeptible to the screen and short-pass game - if those LBs don't tackle 5 yard passes go for 30 yards).

Slowik is more of an 8-man box guy, which Shanny prefers, but his 8-man box didn't stop anybody when he was in GB. Their run D was inconsistent, and their ability to get to the QB was atrocious. He's also not a guy who gets lots of turnovers, which is somewhat odd for a blitz defense.

Things you need to be successful in the theoretical Slowik D:

- DBs who can cover. We are gonna play a lot of man coverage, so they'd better be able to handle their responsibilities. We should be fine in this at least, provided we can find a cover safety somewhere. They also need to tackle, because if they whiff it's 6 points. So when Bly goes for a pick he'd better get it.

- LBs who can tackle. There's a lot of open field when extra men are tearing after the QB, so if the ball-carrier comes your way you'd better be able to get to him and put him on the turf. With Gold theoretically out of the picture, we should improve here, and a possible LB in the draft would help too. It's also good if they're fast, so that he has multiple LB options when calling blitzes, and once again - when you get to the QB, TACKLE HIM.

- Mobile DL. Ends and tackles will drop into coverage as the zone-blitzing scheme takes over, so you need guys who can at least fill passing lanes. They also will be stunting and running around rather than just occupying their blockers. Our DL is faster than it is big, so this should be fine.

- Offense that can score. A blitzing D will give up touchdowns. It just happens. When there are 8 guys in the box, then it naturally follows that once you get out of the box there are only 3 men between you and the goal line. We're gonna need to get better in the red zone to cover for TD mistaks by our newly-aggressive defense.

Positives:

- Our personnel is MUCH better suited for this style of D. Our DTs are mobile, our DL are pass-rushers (especially Doom), our LBs (sans Gold) are fast, our corners can handle man-on-man. These are all positives for the Slowik D. In the Bates Scheme our DTs were too small, our LBs didn't fill gaps, and our corners' coverage abilities were wasted. Marcus Thomas especially should reap immediate benefits from a scheme that lets him get upfield.

- More than one Bronco has apparently said that Slowik taking over was something that should have happened last year. Bates and Slowik...mmm...didn't exactly share in the DC duties - even though Bob was DC in name it was name-only. He hung out with the DBs, coached them up, and let Bates be hoisted by his own petard.

- Our main success on D came with Atwater playing roving run-support and with our team pinning its ears back and going after the QB. And after watching both Coyer and Bates get run out of town using schemes that ignored the blitz (strangely in Larry's case, since he blitzed before) I'm more than ready to see QB pressure brought again.

Negatives:

- We have a lot of young players who will now be on what is essentially their 3rd scheme in 3 years, whether they were in college or dealing with the Coyer/Bates/Slowik revolving door on the Broncos. I don't know how fast they will pick it up, and according to them they NEVER picked up the Bates Scheme enough to truly be effective with it the whole time he was here. How long will they need to get the hang of Slowik's?

- Slowik has been wishy-washy about his scheme. He abandoned the blitz in GB after getting torched early in the season, and never really recovered. Owens and the Eagles utterly crushed the bland zone he ran out there in the playoff game at the end of the '04 season, and after a terrible season that game was the cherry on top that got him fired. Not only is it hard to pick up new schemes, but if the coordinator isn't fully behind it that makes it even harder.

- Slowik's version of the blitz scheme has never really been shown to be successful. He was on Dave W.'s staff at Chicago, and they never got it done. His one year w/ Cleveland they were the worst in the league, but then they were an expansion team so they should have been. And at GB his job was so underwhelming he was 1-and-done again. Is the 4th time the charm?

I guess we get several months to dream that it is before we start seeing it implemented and have our opinions informed by some more recent facts.

~G

[mclark]

In his press conference Shanahan said, "We have a philosophy here on defense that I would like to get back to a little bit, and Bob (Slowik) knows that philosophy. So that's why I think he will do a great job."

Does anyone know what he's referring to?

ATTACK, ATTACK, ATTACK! That's the philosophy. Execution has been a bit of a problem over the years however.

In all honesty, our defensive philosophy for years has been: "Bend but don't break." When we have been successful the philosphy has been: "Bend but don't break. And win the game with turnovers."

[mclark]

Light em up, send in the hounds, grit your teeth, and at all cost that QB better be laying on the ground.


This sounds like the NEW philosophy.

[Broncolingus]

Bronco's 2008 defensive Philosophy...

1. Generate no and inhibit any/all pass rush from the defensive line.
2. Play hard-hitting, physical games only against the KC Chiefs.
3. Blow or give away 4th QTR leads in 3-4 games.
4. Continue to put teams into 'difficult' 3rd down situations drive after drive and then let them successfully convert most all of them (see point #1).
5. Be on the short end of game/back-breaking big plays that demoralize the team and eliminate any chance of ever regaining momentum.
6. DO NOT make any adjustments at anytime during the game regardless of what the other team is doing offensively.
7. Start and play one of the worst and physically weakest LBs in the NFL (hint, rhymes with ‘fold’)
8. Re-adopt and slightly modify to the slogan “Orange Slush” based on defensive philosophy and play.

Oh, wait...that must have been 2007...and 2006...and...

[SmilinAssasSin27]

Well, if the Safety is blitzing than maybe Lynch can still help us. At least this draft is full of LBs since G's description states we may need some new ones.

[Dean]

Bob is a zone blitzing DC. WHen you look at his track record on all the teams hes been a DC on........None of them finished better than 22nd overall.........This guy sucks so bad, SO lets see Shanny hires the guy who was fired in GB for Bates. Bates goes to Gb and tuns them into a top 10 defense......We hire the guy who was fired for Bates.....GO figure..... This is just another stupid move Shanny is making. You all get ready for another horrible year of defense. Slowick is a proven loser.


http://dack.com/archive/bob-slowik-must-be-fired.html




This is just one of many posts where posters pass on what someone else has already embellished upon. Check your facts.

Bates was the defensive coordinator for Green Bay in 2005. His defense gave up 344 points for an average of 21.5 points per game. there were only 12 teams of the 32 that did worse. That team was ranked 23 in rushing defense giving up 125.6 yards per game. Do these stats sound familiar? Poor run defense coupled with giving up a lot of points.

Bates did not do an excellent job there and he did even worse here. It was time for a change.

[nevcraw]

Slowik runs a blitz scheme. Some of it's zone, some of it's edge w/ DBs, but his preferred method of attack is the blitz. He'll do it vs. both the run and the pass. He also lets his linemen stunt far more than we've seen the last coupla years, which will leave running gaps if done at the wrong time.

LB play is absolutely crucial in his defense, both to clean up after failed stunts open running lanes and to get to the QB on delayed blitzes, as well as in pass coverage responsibilities (because a blitzing team is very succeptible to the screen and short-pass game - if those LBs don't tackle 5 yard passes go for 30 yards).

Slowik is more of an 8-man box guy, which Shanny prefers, but his 8-man box didn't stop anybody when he was in GB. Their run D was inconsistent, and their ability to get to the QB was atrocious. He's also not a guy who gets lots of turnovers, which is somewhat odd for a blitz defense.

Things you need to be successful in the theoretical Slowik D:

- DBs who can cover. We are gonna play a lot of man coverage, so they'd better be able to handle their responsibilities. We should be fine in this at least, provided we can find a cover safety somewhere. They also need to tackle, because if they whiff it's 6 points. So when Bly goes for a pick he'd better get it.

- LBs who can tackle. There's a lot of open field when extra men are tearing after the QB, so if the ball-carrier comes your way you'd better be able to get to him and put him on the turf. With Gold theoretically out of the picture, we should improve here, and a possible LB in the draft would help too. It's also good if they're fast, so that he has multiple LB options when calling blitzes, and once again - when you get to the QB, TACKLE HIM.

- Mobile DL. Ends and tackles will drop into coverage as the zone-blitzing scheme takes over, so you need guys who can at least fill passing lanes. They also will be stunting and running around rather than just occupying their blockers. Our DL is faster than it is big, so this should be fine.

- Offense that can score. A blitzing D will give up touchdowns. It just happens. When there are 8 guys in the box, then it naturally follows that once you get out of the box there are only 3 men between you and the goal line. We're gonna need to get better in the red zone to cover for TD mistaks by our newly-aggressive defense.

Positives:

- Our personnel is MUCH better suited for this style of D. Our DTs are mobile, our DL are pass-rushers (especially Doom), our LBs (sans Gold) are fast, our corners can handle man-on-man. These are all positives for the Slowik D. In the Bates Scheme our DTs were too small, our LBs didn't fill gaps, and our corners' coverage abilities were wasted. Marcus Thomas especially should reap immediate benefits from a scheme that lets him get upfield.

- More than one Bronco has apparently said that Slowik taking over was something that should have happened last year. Bates and Slowik...mmm...didn't exactly share in the DC duties - even though Bob was DC in name it was name-only. He hung out with the DBs, coached them up, and let Bates be hoisted by his own petard.

- Our main success on D came with Atwater playing roving run-support and with our team pinning its ears back and going after the QB. And after watching both Coyer and Bates get run out of town using schemes that ignored the blitz (strangely in Larry's case, since he blitzed before) I'm more than ready to see QB pressure brought again.

Negatives:

- We have a lot of young players who will now be on what is essentially their 3rd scheme in 3 years, whether they were in college or dealing with the Coyer/Bates/Slowik revolving door on the Broncos. I don't know how fast they will pick it up, and according to them they NEVER picked up the Bates Scheme enough to truly be effective with it the whole time he was here. How long will they need to get the hang of Slowik's?

- Slowik has been wishy-washy about his scheme. He abandoned the blitz in GB after getting torched early in the season, and never really recovered. Owens and the Eagles utterly crushed the bland zone he ran out there in the playoff game at the end of the '04 season, and after a terrible season that game was the cherry on top that got him fired. Not only is it hard to pick up new schemes, but if the coordinator isn't fully behind it that makes it even harder.

- Slowik's version of the blitz scheme has never really been shown to be successful. He was on Dave W.'s staff at Chicago, and they never got it done. His one year w/ Cleveland they were the worst in the league, but then they were an expansion team so they should have been. And at GB his job was so underwhelming he was 1-and-done again. Is the 4th time the charm?

I guess we get several months to dream that it is before we start seeing it implemented and have our opinions informed by some more recent facts.

~G

It sounds like Coyer's D only with more Blitzing..
Let's hope the Offense can generate the necc. points to keep this Defense from being exposed and run down by mid-season.
Slo may have learned from his failures and re-written his Defensive blueprints to not Screw the pooch one more time.

[Simple Jaded]

In his press conference Shanahan said, "We have a philosophy here on defense that I would like to get back to a little bit, and Bob (Slowik) knows that philosophy. So that's why I think he will do a great job."

Does anyone know what he's referring to?


He's talking about "The Assistant Coaches Will Do What I F'ing Tell Them" philosophy, I believe......

[Simple Jaded]

This is just one of many posts where posters pass on what someone else has already embellished upon. Check your facts.

Bates was the defensive coordinator for Green Bay in 2005. His defense gave up 344 points for an average of 21.5 points per game. there were only 12 teams of the 32 that did worse. That team was ranked 23 in rushing defense giving up 125.6 yards per game. Do these stats sound familiar? Poor run defense coupled with giving up a lot of points.

Bates did not do an excellent job there and he did even worse here. It was time for a change.


And that would have been fine had Shanahan not replaced him with Slowik.

Personally, I just like Bates philosophy better than Slowik's......Manning/Brady and the like will love it though......

[Watchthemiddle]

I just want a defense that keeps the offense off balance..instead of the offense ALWAYS keeping our defense off balance.

Attack, attack, attack, stop the run, zone,...mix it up...do whatever.

It can't get any worse then it was this year.

[Lonestar]

He's talking about "The Assistant Coaches Will Do What I Tell Them" philosophy, I believe......


I agree he is not longer just the HC and VP of operations he is the dictator of Broncovile USA..

[Lonestar]

I just want a defense that keeps the offense off balance..instead of the offense ALWAYS keeping our defense off balance.

Attack, attack, attack, stop the run, zone,...mix it up...do whatever.

It can't get any worse then it was this year.

wanna bet?

[jrelway]

cant be any worse than bates' unblitz scheme.

[Watchthemiddle]

wanna bet?

Record wise it can, but our defense can't really get any worse then it was.

Can it?:confused:

[Jwalk - JayCutty6Goes - CasinoRoyal]

This is just one of many posts where posters pass on what someone else has already embellished upon. Check your facts.

Bates was the defensive coordinator for Green Bay in 2005. His defense gave up 344 points for an average of 21.5 points per game. there were only 12 teams of the 32 that did worse. That team was ranked 23 in rushing defense giving up 125.6 yards per game. Do these stats sound familiar? Poor run defense coupled with giving up a lot of points.

Bates did not do an excellent job there and he did even worse here. It was time for a change.

UHhhhh Dean you are aware that packers have one of the best Defense since 06 right? And there running Bates system till this day......Bates system is proven it works. So it took the Packers a year to understand it huh? Go figure we fire him after ONE year.... SLowick is trash and been trash everywhere he went. Packers had all kinda horrible records set when Slowick was there DC.

[fcspikeit]

Slowik runs a blitz scheme. Some of it's zone, some of it's edge w/ DBs, but his preferred method of attack is the blitz. He'll do it vs. both the run and the pass. He also lets his linemen stunt far more than we've seen the last coupla years, which will leave running gaps if done at the wrong time.

LB play is absolutely crucial in his defense, both to clean up after failed stunts open running lanes and to get to the QB on delayed blitzes, as well as in pass coverage responsibilities (because a blitzing team is very succeptible to the screen and short-pass game - if those LBs don't tackle 5 yard passes go for 30 yards).

Slowik is more of an 8-man box guy, which Shanny prefers, but his 8-man box didn't stop anybody when he was in GB. Their run D was inconsistent, and their ability to get to the QB was atrocious. He's also not a guy who gets lots of turnovers, which is somewhat odd for a blitz defense.

Things you need to be successful in the theoretical Slowik D:

- DBs who can cover. We are gonna play a lot of man coverage, so they'd better be able to handle their responsibilities. We should be fine in this at least, provided we can find a cover safety somewhere. They also need to tackle, because if they whiff it's 6 points. So when Bly goes for a pick he'd better get it.

- LBs who can tackle. There's a lot of open field when extra men are tearing after the QB, so if the ball-carrier comes your way you'd better be able to get to him and put him on the turf. With Gold theoretically out of the picture, we should improve here, and a possible LB in the draft would help too. It's also good if they're fast, so that he has multiple LB options when calling blitzes, and once again - when you get to the QB, TACKLE HIM.

- Mobile DL. Ends and tackles will drop into coverage as the zone-blitzing scheme takes over, so you need guys who can at least fill passing lanes. They also will be stunting and running around rather than just occupying their blockers. Our DL is faster than it is big, so this should be fine.

- Offense that can score. A blitzing D will give up touchdowns. It just happens. When there are 8 guys in the box, then it naturally follows that once you get out of the box there are only 3 men between you and the goal line. We're gonna need to get better in the red zone to cover for TD mistaks by our newly-aggressive defense.

Positives:

- Our personnel is MUCH better suited for this style of D. Our DTs are mobile, our DL are pass-rushers (especially Doom), our LBs (sans Gold) are fast, our corners can handle man-on-man. These are all positives for the Slowik D. In the Bates Scheme our DTs were too small, our LBs didn't fill gaps, and our corners' coverage abilities were wasted. Marcus Thomas especially should reap immediate benefits from a scheme that lets him get upfield.

- More than one Bronco has apparently said that Slowik taking over was something that should have happened last year. Bates and Slowik...mmm...didn't exactly share in the DC duties - even though Bob was DC in name it was name-only. He hung out with the DBs, coached them up, and let Bates be hoisted by his own petard.

- Our main success on D came with Atwater playing roving run-support and with our team pinning its ears back and going after the QB. And after watching both Coyer and Bates get run out of town using schemes that ignored the blitz (strangely in Larry's case, since he blitzed before) I'm more than ready to see QB pressure brought again.

Negatives:

- We have a lot of young players who will now be on what is essentially their 3rd scheme in 3 years, whether they were in college or dealing with the Coyer/Bates/Slowik revolving door on the Broncos. I don't know how fast they will pick it up, and according to them they NEVER picked up the Bates Scheme enough to truly be effective with it the whole time he was here. How long will they need to get the hang of Slowik's?

- Slowik has been wishy-washy about his scheme. He abandoned the blitz in GB after getting torched early in the season, and never really recovered. Owens and the Eagles utterly crushed the bland zone he ran out there in the playoff game at the end of the '04 season, and after a terrible season that game was the cherry on top that got him fired. Not only is it hard to pick up new schemes, but if the coordinator isn't fully behind it that makes it even harder.

- Slowik's version of the blitz scheme has never really been shown to be successful. He was on Dave W.'s staff at Chicago, and they never got it done. His one year w/ Cleveland they were the worst in the league, but then they were an expansion team so they should have been. And at GB his job was so underwhelming he was 1-and-done again. Is the 4th time the charm?

I guess we get several months to dream that it is before we start seeing it implemented and have our opinions informed by some more recent facts.

~G

This makes me excited,,,

I would much rather have our blitzing D from 05 over the bend then brake D we had in 06.

The thought of getting pressure on the QB from anywhere is a pleasant one

[SoCoPoCo]

I just hope we get back to the philosophy of 'points given up' - I seem to recall that was something that Shanahan always pointed to: the quality teams who can win the SB are traditionally stingiest when it comes to good old-fashioned scoring more than the other guy.

[Bronco9798]

I'm sure we'll play a lot of bend but don't break football next year.

[SmilinAssasSin27]

it worked for 10 weeks in 2006.

[WARHORSE]

Our Defensive Philosophy??


First, we identify target:
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/warhorse001/GAYDAH.jpg




Second:http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/warhorse001/sharkfin.gif




Third:http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/warhorse001/matrix_001.gif




Fourth:http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/warhorse001/gunnin.gif




Fifth:http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/warhorse001/FACESLAP.gif




Sixth: (Second string goes in)http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/warhorse001/kickbaby.gif

[WARHORSE]

After the game:


http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/warhorse001/bluesbrothers.gif


http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/warhorse001/boombox.gif


http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/warhorse001/oldmanairguitar.gif

THEN WE:

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/warhorse001/fireworks.gif

THEN WE: http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/warhorse001/struttingrooster.gif



LASTLY:

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/warhorse001/m_1fb7a1cd14d2c2073ce8a8ff2dc54e37.jpg


Thats our defensive philosophy

[Hawgdriver]

Bates system is proven it works.

Bates system is also proven it doesn't work.

[Bronco9798]

Where you've been and what you have done means nothing.

It's what you do with the next opportunity you get.

[MOtorboat]

Where you've been and what you have done means nothing.

It's what you do with the next opportunity you get.

Wow. That was deep Niner.

[Bronco9798]

Wow. That was deep Niner.

I'm a scholar. :D

[WARHORSE]

Where you've been and what you have done means nothing.

It's what you do with the next opportunity you get.


Yeah, Bates sat out a year as well.


Cobwebs?

Its possible.

[Bronco9798]

Yeah, Bates sat out a year as well.


Cobwebs?

Its possible.

It's called an excuse. When you're as old as Bates, you don't develop cobweds in a year. I'm sure coaching is like riding a bike, you don't forget. You can always get better, sure. But, I'm not buying the cobwebs. He spun his own web!

[Lonestar]

Bates system is also proven it doesn't work.


no what was proven was Bates system does not work in DEN without the necessary players.. Much like baking cake and not using flour.. What comes out is a baked omelet.


BTW the real answer for the thread title is whatever mikeys WANTS it to be..

[Jwalk - JayCutty6Goes - CasinoRoyal]

This makes me excited,,,

I would much rather have our blitzing D from 05 over the bend then brake D we had in 06.

The thought of getting pressure on the QB from anywhere is a pleasant one

Oh so your excited about having adefense that no longer bends and bends it just breaks and snaps in half with the first swing???

[Stargazer]

In his press conference Shanahan said, "We have a philosophy here on defense that I would like to get back to a little bit, and Bob (Slowik) knows that philosophy. So that's why I think he will do a great job."

Does anyone know what he's referring to?

Stop the run.

An instant 3 and out would be nice.

Pressure from the DT's

LB's picking the correct assignments.

:D

[Dean]

UHhhhh Dean you are aware that packers have one of the best Defense since 06 right? And there running Bates system till this day......Bates system is proven it works. So it took the Packers a year to understand it huh? Go figure we fire him after ONE year.... SLowick is trash and been trash everywhere he went. Packers had all kinda horrible records set when Slowick was there DC.


I am unaware of many things but this topic is not one of them.

The Packers still have their D-ends split wide (a tight 9 technique) but not as wide as Bates did. They have one D-tackle @ 320 but most are around 300 pounds and they are one gap penetraters. This isn't Bates defense or he was hiding his defense while he was with the Broncos.

[Lonestar]

Stop the run.

An instant 3 and out would be nice.

Pressure from the DT's

LB's picking the correct assignments.

:D

I'd take an occasional 3 and out every once in a while.. Those have been few and far between especially on their end of the field..

[AFGAHNI_BATTLE_DONKEY]

hopefully the philosophy is to not give up points next year because i think this years philosophy was to let the opponent run all over us and score atleast 3 touchdowns a game.

[Jwalk - JayCutty6Goes - CasinoRoyal]

Bates system is also proven it doesn't work.

Yeah with Crappy front 7 it will never work, Since the whole thing is built off having a good front 7.

[fcspikeit]

Oh so your excited about having adefense that no longer bends and bends it just breaks and snaps in half with the first swing???

Name the top 5 defenses and you will find, they all have one thing in common. They get to the QB. If you can't get there with your down lineman, you have to send more guys, its as simple as that! YOU HAVE TO GET TO THE QB!!!

The defense most consider the best of all time blitzed on every other play, some times as many as 10 guys.

Pittsburgh has one of the best defenses every year, do you think its a coincidence they are called Blitzburgh :confused:

Playing soft, bend don't brake defense might work against the Steve Mcnair's of the world but the Brady's and Mannings tear them up!

How did the Bolts beat the Colts? It sure wasn't by setting back and watching manning cut their defense up. What did they do on that 4th down play? Sent Merriman on the blitz and that's what forced Manning into the bad throw. Giants did the same thing against Romo.

The bend don't brake defence is simple playing prevent the whole game. Teams that play prevent at the end of games, lose more then they win!

[Jwalk - JayCutty6Goes - CasinoRoyal]

Name the top 5 defenses and you will find, they all have one thing in common. They get to the QB. If you can't get there with your down lineman, you have to send more guys, its as simple as that! YOU HAVE TO GET TO THE QB!!!

The defense most consider the best of all time blitzed on every other play, some times as many as 10 guys.

Pittsburgh has one of the best defenses every year, do you think its a coincidence they are called Blitzburgh :confused:

Playing soft, bend don't brake defense might work against the Steve Mcnair's of the world but the Brady's and Mannings tear them up!

How did the Bolts beat the Colts? It sure wasn't by setting back and watching manning cut their defense up. What did they do on that 4th down play? Sent Merriman on the blitz and that's what forced Manning into the bad throw. Giants did the same thing against Romo.

The bend don't brake defence is simple playing prevent the whole game. Teams that play prevent at the end of games, lose more then they win!

Uhhh the Chargers always play the colts tough and the chargers didnt blitz much at all, They can get pressure with there 3-4 ends who they rush most the time.. Bottom line it dont matter if you blitz because just because your blitzing dont mean you will get there dude exspecially when you blitz packages are as simple and dumb as slowicks was. You can be excited about having a guy who was fired for Bates. I wont. Everytime hes been a DC his defenses was horrible........

[weazel]

a defensive philosophy???

they've been through 6 defensive coordinators in 9 years! Theres no philosophy, theres just grasping at straws and hoping one works.

[G_Money]

Slowik runs a blitz scheme. Some of it's zone, some of it's edge w/ DBs, but his preferred method of attack is the blitz. He'll do it vs. both the run and the pass. He also lets his linemen stunt far more than we've seen the last coupla years, which will leave running gaps if done at the wrong time.

LB play is absolutely crucial in his defense, both to clean up after failed stunts open running lanes and to get to the QB on delayed blitzes, as well as in pass coverage responsibilities (because a blitzing team is very succeptible to the screen and short-pass game - if those LBs don't tackle 5 yard passes go for 30 yards).

Slowik is more of an 8-man box guy, which Shanny prefers, but his 8-man box didn't stop anybody when he was in GB. Their run D was inconsistent, and their ability to get to the QB was atrocious. He's also not a guy who gets lots of turnovers, which is somewhat odd for a blitz defense.

Things you need to be successful in the theoretical Slowik D:

- DBs who can cover. We are gonna play a lot of man coverage, so they'd better be able to handle their responsibilities. We should be fine in this at least, provided we can find a cover safety somewhere. They also need to tackle, because if they whiff it's 6 points. So when Bly goes for a pick he'd better get it.

- LBs who can tackle. There's a lot of open field when extra men are tearing after the QB, so if the ball-carrier comes your way you'd better be able to get to him and put him on the turf. With Gold theoretically out of the picture, we should improve here, and a possible LB in the draft would help too. It's also good if they're fast, so that he has multiple LB options when calling blitzes, and once again - when you get to the QB, TACKLE HIM.

- Mobile DL. Ends and tackles will drop into coverage as the zone-blitzing scheme takes over, so you need guys who can at least fill passing lanes. They also will be stunting and running around rather than just occupying their blockers. Our DL is faster than it is big, so this should be fine.

- Offense that can score. A blitzing D will give up touchdowns. It just happens. When there are 8 guys in the box, then it naturally follows that once you get out of the box there are only 3 men between you and the goal line. We're gonna need to get better in the red zone to cover for TD mistakes by our newly-aggressive defense.

Positives:

- Our personnel is MUCH better suited for this style of D. Our DTs are mobile, our DL are pass-rushers (especially Doom), our LBs (sans Gold) are fast, our corners can handle man-on-man. These are all positives for the Slowik D. In the Bates Scheme our DTs were too small, our LBs didn't fill gaps, and our corners' coverage abilities were wasted. Marcus Thomas especially should reap immediate benefits from a scheme that lets him get upfield.

- More than one Bronco has apparently said that Slowik taking over was something that should have happened last year. Bates and Slowik...mmm...didn't exactly share in the DC duties - even though Bob was DC in name it was name-only. He hung out with the DBs, coached them up, and let Bates be hoisted by his own petard.

- Our main success on D came with Atwater playing roving run-support and with our team pinning its ears back and going after the QB. And after watching both Coyer and Bates get run out of town using schemes that ignored the blitz (strangely in Larry's case, since he blitzed before) I'm more than ready to see QB pressure brought again.

Negatives:

- We have a lot of young players who will now be on what is essentially their 3rd scheme in 3 years, whether they were in college or dealing with the Coyer/Bates/Slowik revolving door on the Broncos. I don't know how fast they will pick it up, and according to them they NEVER picked up the Bates Scheme enough to truly be effective with it the whole time he was here. How long will they need to get the hang of Slowik's?

- Slowik has been wishy-washy about his scheme. He abandoned the blitz in GB after getting torched early in the season, and never really recovered. Owens and the Eagles utterly crushed the bland zone he ran out there in the playoff game at the end of the '04 season, and after a terrible season that game was the cherry on top that got him fired. Not only is it hard to pick up new schemes, but if the coordinator isn't fully behind it that makes it even harder.

- Slowik's version of the blitz scheme has never really been shown to be successful. He was on Dave W.'s staff at Chicago, and they never got it done. His one year w/ Cleveland they were the worst in the league, but then they were an expansion team so they should have been. And at GB his job was so underwhelming he was 1-and-done again. Is the 4th time the charm?

I guess we get several months to dream that it is before we start seeing it implemented and have our opinions informed by some more recent facts.

~G

I hate it when I get the negatives right, dammit. :tsk:

FIX IT, SLOWIK. I'm obviously not getting a new coordinator before the new year, so it's on you.

If you're gonna blitz, blitz. Prevent zone isn't even a joke, it's an abomination. Make sure people know their responsibilities. Try to tackle those short passes before they make big yards. The only guys who have been missed by the QB in the last two weeks were the QB's fault - bad passes, not good defense.

You're killing us. It doesn't show on the scoreboard, but DAMN man. Buy a clue if you have to, but get one - fast.

~G

[weazel]

a defensive philosophy???

they've been through 6 defensive coordinators in 9 years! Theres no philosophy, theres just grasping at straws and hoping one works.

woohoo, I remember that

[Lonestar]

I'll say it again..
Until Pat forces mikey to get a top notch DC and stay out of his way we will continue to have hacks in here..

Right now I'm not sure qualified DC would even want to coach in DEN with mikey looking over his shoulder all the time..

I do not think Bates was the guy that mikey wanted and other than allow him to get the DL guys he wanted I do not think mikey went out of his way to step back and let him be in total control of the D. Slowik was a buffer between the DC and his D.. We all know how that worked out now don't we..

I'm not sure that bates was the answer, other than he was ultra succesful in MIA and his players loved him, but the BIGGER simple fact after 3 games it doesn't appear that Slowik is either..

[G_Money]

Seeing how much Mike likes Bates as the heir apparent to, well, himself with Reeves and Kubes with Shanny, I half-wonder if we brought in the elder Bates just to get our hands on the younger one.

We needed a DC so we could make that happen, and we got the guy for Jay that Shanny wanted.

Regardless, Slowik needs to figure out how to blitz effectively - or even how NOT to blitz without playing a prevent. Nothing he's doing is even slowing down the opposition. If they play close, big plays happen. If they give up the short stuff then 15 play drives ensue. Screen passes and plays in the flat are regularly busted for big gains. We don't know how we are on third downs because on most scoring drives the opposition doesn't face 3rd downs. If it's an obvious run we seem to do well on short-yardage but if there's any wiggle room, we give it up.

It's not promising. DJ claims it's just mistakes by the players and not the scheme, but "mistakes by the players" was the claim last year, after which several players said they NEVER understood what they were supposed to be doing.

Nothing looks different this year, so either we have a lot of stupid players or some seriously bad coaching communicators.

Or maybe the scheme just sucks - again. :coffee:

I'd prefer that to our DL being totally useless, because in theory it's easier to fix a scheme than replace that many players with adequate NFL players instead of mannequins.

But we haven't had much luck with either DL OR schemers in the last decade. That's something we'll have to fix if we want to take full advantage of this suddenly high-octane offense we're sporting.

~G

[Broncolingus]

Over the past 10 years, we've had a good number of All-Pro LBs and a few All-Pro DBs...

With the exception of Pryce, who was the last Denver defensive lineman who was consistently All-Pro?

Also, Denver's changed Defensive Coordinator's like underwear for the past almost decade too with the same result year after year...

Until Denver solves the defensive line problem (as in get some friggin animals who can beeotch slap the physical O-lineman in the league and actually scare some QBs) this is what we'll have...

[Lonestar]

Over the past 10 years, we've had a good number of All-Pro LBs and a few All-Pro DBs...

With the exception of Pryce, who was the last Denver defensive lineman who was consistently All-Pro?

Also, Denver's changed Defensive Coordinator's like underwear for the past almost decade too with the same result year after year...

Until Denver solves the defensive line problem (as in get some friggin animals who can beeotch slap the physical O-lineman in the league and actually scare some QBs) this is what we'll have...

finally someone else gets it

You win and lose @ the LOS..


If the QB has all day to throw the ball he can complete 70% or better.. If they can run on you they can then pass on you.. If the LOS is yours then nothing happens consistently..

[Broncolingus]

In his press conference Shanahan said, "We have a philosophy here on defense that I would like to get back to a little bit, and Bob (Slowik) knows that philosophy. So that's why I think he will do a great job."

Does anyone know what he's referring to?

Apparently, it's:

1. get a big lead...say, 21-3 for example...
2. THEN generate NO pass-rush for the rest of the game...
3. THEN let the other team's QB sit back and pick your defense apart while your poor LBs and DBs struggle to run in coverage for 10-20 seconds...
4. THEN try and score just enough points to hang on for the win.

Oh wait!

That's the philosphy we have NOW...

[dogfish]

i've been meaning to start a thread on this topic, but since this one's already here. . . there are a number of points i want to address here, so forgive the verbosity. . . :laugh:



What is our defensive Philosophy now?

I think that's a question to which we need to find both a short-term and a long-term answer. Preferably they should be the same, because otherwise we're just spinning our wheels. We need to pick something and freakin' settle on it already! Not only does that give you the necessary time to accumulate the proper personnel for a specific scheme, but it gives your younger players the chance to develop and get comfortable. Over the long run, this should produce better results because reads and assignments become second nature, and guys can react without thinking-- faster play plus fewer mental mistakes adds up to better defense! Just ask Pittsburgh, Tampa Bay or New England. Plus, when you have a settled scheme, you have a better chance to find later round values in the draft. Undersized LBs that most teams don't want can be effective in the Cover-2; Defensive ends too small to be fulltime starters in the 4-3 often convert to quality 3-4 OLBs. This is one of the reasons that Pitt continues to crank out good linebackers, just like we've gotten quality interior OLs in the late rounds over the years because they were too small for traditional power blocking schemes.

So, this is really a two-fold question-- what's the best way to procede this year, and what's best going forward? These questions need to be answered now if we're going to get it right! First off, it's clear that we really have a potent offense that's ready to win now-- in a year where the AFC looks suddenly and unexpectedly wide open (at least for now, I know it's still very early in the season), we just might have a legitimate shot at making a deep playoff run if we can get even respectable production from the alleged defense, as opposed to the utter garbage we're getting right now. Also, it's pretty obvious that we're going to have to focus on rebuilding the D starting this offseason, as it's a wreck and the O looks like a machine. We really need to have a cohesive, long-range plan ready so that we're not just blindly throwing darts at the wall in the draft and free agency.

In my opinion, the best place to start is by looking at what we already have on hand. It's not great, to be sure, but I'm of the opinion that the cupboard isn't as completely bare as our current results might lead one to believe. We do have some solid athletes, and we should be able to get more out of them than we are at the moment. So what scheme is our personnel best suited for? What would give them the best chance of success, and what do we have to build around going forward? I think we can all agree that we have pure 4-3 personnel, with very few guys that would really fit comfortably in a 3-4. Unless we want to mostly start from scratch next year, I think 3-4 is out-- unless you're just talking about a gimmick version to present some different looks on a few snaps here and there, but I don't think we really have the right guys to even look at a hybrid front. We don't have a nosetackle, or any base ends big enough to effectively two-gap. Nor do we have even a single edge rusher with any experience playing from a two-point stance or dropping into coverage.

I don't think we're much closer to being suited for the Cover-2. For one thing, we simply don't have a front four that can consistently generate pressure. We also lack safeties with the desired deep range and athleticism. Our LBs do have that range and athleticism for the required coverage drops, but they're hardly the most instinctive bunch. Champ can play any scheme, but I tend to think he's most effective in man coverage. Bly just doesn't tackle well enough for the run-support duties of a Cover-2 corner, and he sucked in the system in Detroit.

Since our personnel was (apparently) put togther to play a man-heavy scheme with an eight-man box, that's probably what it makes the most sense to stick with. However, this soft zone bullshit seriously needs to go! My opinion is that the best thing we can do is go with an aggressive, blitz-heavy version of the 4-3 similar to what Jim Johnson has run for all these years in Philly, to what his disciple Steve Spagnuolo is currently running in New York. Similar to what we ran back in 2005. It helped us get past a previously playoff-perfect New England team to the AFC Championship game, just as it helped the underdog G-men put an end to the unbeaten streak of those same Patsies. Slowik was here in '05, so we know that he's familiar with that scheme.

Sure, it's a high-risk scheme, and sometimes you're going to get burned for big plays. But what the hell! At least it also puts you in a position to MAKE some plays! If you just go out and let teams march up and down the field on you, it's very little consolation that they had to wear you down and take it in small chunks rather than getting the quick strike. If anything, it just increases your chances of getting defenders hurt when they're on the field longer and worn down, and gets your O out of rhythm while they sit on the bench. In my opinion, you're essentially just hoping that the offense will make a mistake, take a penalty or run a bad play on first down and stall the drive. I hate that passive approach-- there's nothing more demoralizing than getting methodically picked apart, and I think it also sends a vote of no confidence to your players. "We know we can't make a play to stop them, so we'll drop everyone in coverage and try to slow them down." I know I'm just a fan, but I can't freakin' stand that style of play. I'd much rather go down swinging-- bring pressure, try to disrupt what they're doing and dictate to them. Press the LOS and attack the run. Shift your formations and try to confuse them-- maybe somebody misses an assignment and you get a free run at the QB, or at least a mismatch. Force their QB to make quick decisions, because we ALL know that even a mediocre QB at this level can pick apart a secondary if he can just stand in the pocket all flippin' day waiting for a receiver to uncover. :mad: Even the best DBs can only hold their coverage for so long, and Karl "Weak Link" Paymah can almost always be exposed for a completion.

When we brought the big blitz back in '05, we were fourth in the league in points allowed, and in the top seven in turnovers forced. While the personnel on that unit was better than what we have now, I truly don't think it was that much better. The seconday was very comparable, the LBs were a little better. The D-line was unquestionably tougher against the run, but no better at rushing the passer. As feeble as this front seven looks, they're certainly younger and more athletic than that group. I say, let them just line up and get after it-- let them move forward instead of backwards, try to play on the other side of the line of scrimmage. Let our highly-paid man corners do what they're paid for and play out on the island some of the time. If they get beat, they get beat-- so what? They're getting beat anyways, and this way we're not even giving them a chance. At least we have the kind of quick-strike offense that can make up for mistakes when the D does give up a big play. This pitiful drop back and let them score on us every time they have the ball nonsense is forcing our O to do a tightwire act where they have to match the other team point for point all day long, and sooner or later they're going to stumble. Hell, the way we're playing right now puts way more pressure on our OWN offense than we are the opposing unit! :frusty:

I need to re-watch the last two games before I say too much, but from what I've seen watching them live, even when we do blitz it's usually a half-assed, conservative, bring one extra guy approach most of the time. Just my opinion obviously, and maybe I'm completely off base, but as far as I'm concerned there isn't a defensive philosophy out there that's any worse than this pansy, bend and then break bullshit. I say forget this prevent garbage-- blitz the hell out of them and let the chips fall where they may!

[broncofaninfla]

The talent just isn't there for us. We have solid DB's on defense and Williams, that's it.

[eessydo]

That philosophy is, "don't let the other team outscore our defense, we are not concerned about how many points you allow. At the end of the day less than our offense is one more win."

[Reidman]

Dog, excellent post man!

I'm with you 100%. What's the point of being out on the field on D if you're not going to apply some pressure? It was pissing me off to no end watching a 3 man pass rush in yesterday's game. I understand they were defending the pass but hell why give Brees all the time he needs to find an open receiver? I watch other teams bring the heat on veteran QB's and it really breaks down the play. We need to get back to that to be successful or at the very least more successful than we are right now...

Right now this dink and dunk, give up 5 to 10 yards a play isn't helping anybody...especially if you have an athletic player who can make guys miss and then your really screwed!

[G_Money]

That philosophy is, "don't let the other team outscore our defense, we are not concerned about how many points you allow. At the end of the day less than our offense is one more win."

And that philosophy is a poor fumble call and a shanked FG from making us 1-2 with the offense scoring 30+ points in each of the last 2 games.

Sooner or later our O is gonna run into a defense that doesn't fold like a lawn chair the second we step on the field. Remember the first couple weeks of last season? "Well, we're stopping the other team to field goals." And then we didn't stop them any more, and at the end of the season figured out that the offenses we had stopped early in the season were bottom-feeders by year-end.

I dunno that the Chargers are gonna have a bottom-feeding D by year-end, but it might just be average.

I'm glad to have the O that we do, but if all another team has to do to beat us is slow us down a little (ie, our exact philosophy with our own defense) and don't have to worry about our D at all, then people are gonna get the hang of it eventually.

We have to be able to adapt, and part of that is settling on some sort of defensive strategy that doesn't start with the phrase "bend over and take it."

For the rest, I'm with dogfish. Bring the heat, attack instead of dropping back scared, and let the chips fall where they may. It can't be less effective than the last two weeks have been on that side of the ball, and it might actually wake the troops up and give em some fire.

Getting to hit people instead of always being hit is a good feeling.

~G

[Cugel]

New defensive philosophy:

Cornerbacks play up to the LOS, mace the WRs as they come off the line.

Safety gets on TE, does the same thing.

LBs all jump on the RB at the same time . . . whether or not he has the ball.

400-lb. defensive linemen, brought in during offseason, throw offensive linemen at the QB.

Meanwhile, cheeleaders do pole dances in their birthday suits for any offensive players the defense might have missed.

Hmmm . . . shaping up to be a pretty good defense . . . :coffee:

-----

:laugh: Well, that was worth a laugh! Of course, they might have to mace some of the opposing WRs more than once!

I propose they let the opponent's best WR score a TD on the opening play, then pile on him in the end-zone and inject him with a sedative, just like in the movie M.A.S.H. The guy wobbles over to the sideline and is done for the game. :laugh:

[Cugel]

Dogfish: So, this is really a two-fold question-- what's the best way to procede this year, and what's best going forward? These questions need to be answered now if we're going to get it right! First off, it's clear that we really have a potent offense that's ready to win now-- in a year where the AFC looks suddenly and unexpectedly wide open (at least for now, I know it's still very early in the season), we just might have a legitimate shot at making a deep playoff run if we can get even respectable production from the alleged defense, as opposed to the utter garbage we're getting right now. Also, it's pretty obvious that we're going to have to focus on rebuilding the D starting this offseason, as it's a wreck and the O looks like a machine. We really need to have a cohesive, long-range plan ready so that we're not just blindly throwing darts at the wall in the draft and free agency.

In my opinion, the best place to start is by looking at what we already have on hand. It's not great, to be sure, but I'm of the opinion that the cupboard isn't as completely bare as our current results might lead one to believe. We do have some solid athletes, and we should be able to get more out of them than we are at the moment. So what scheme is our personnel best suited for? What would give them the best chance of success, and what do we have to build around going forward? I think we can all agree that we have pure 4-3 personnel, with very few guys that would really fit comfortably in a 3-4. Unless we want to mostly start from scratch next year, I think 3-4 is out-- unless you're just talking about a gimmick version to present some different looks on a few snaps here and there, but I don't think we really have the right guys to even look at a hybrid front. We don't have a nosetackle, or any base ends big enough to effectively two-gap. Nor do we have even a single edge rusher with any experience playing from a two-point stance or dropping into coverage.

I don't think we're much closer to being suited for the Cover-2. For one thing, we simply don't have a front four that can consistently generate pressure. We also lack safeties with the desired deep range and athleticism. Our LBs do have that range and athleticism for the required coverage drops, but they're hardly the most instinctive bunch. Champ can play any scheme, but I tend to think he's most effective in man coverage. Bly just doesn't tackle well enough for the run-support duties of a Cover-2 corner, and he sucked in the system in Detroit.

It seems like we've totally treaded water since 2005. The problem in 2005 with the blitzing defense is that good passing teams destroyed it. Mediocre teams with crappy QBs wilted under the pressure.

But, when you get to the playoffs EVERY team has a QB named Brady, Manning, Romo, Rivers, Roethlisberger, etc. Your chances or running up against a dud just aren't that great. Against the Patriots Denver got lucky. Brady's WRs really SUCKED that year and couldn't consistently make the adjustment, and Brady just had an off game. He missed some WIDE open WRs right down the middle of the field for easy TDs.

The Patriots should have had at least 2 more TDs that way and would have won that game.

Then Ben Roethlisberger didn't miss. The Broncos were crushed as big Ben never came off the field all day. He said after the game "we felt we could make the third down, no matter what the distance." And he was right.

Third and 13? No problem. Third and 18? The Broncos blitz and a Roethlisberger hits a wide open WR for 21 yards.

The problem is we've seen exactly the same thing this season. Every time the Broncos have tried to bring the blitz, they get picked up and the QB hits a wide-open WR for a big first down.

They can't stop anybody on 3rd down because they flat can't defend the pass.

And they can't defend the pass because their Safeties flat suck at pass-coverage. Manuel and McCree are just horrible in coverage.

The Broncos tried to go with all cast-offs and FAs this off-season and it's been a disaster. The secondary is just out-matched.

They got rid of Foxworth who was at least a decent nickel CB. Paymah is getting burned and the safeties are worse.

Short of trading for somebody new, I don't see this changing this season.

They need to start via FA and the draft and get a monster pass-rushing DT and two starting safeties.

This won't be easy. Drafting a top flight DL either requires a top 10 draft pick or else a lot of luck. In FA they command a HUGE contract and often underperform. It's just the hardest thing to find in the NFL outside of a franchise QB to get a top pass-rushing DL.

Meanwhile the Broncos DL acquisitions continue to underwhelm. Tim Crowder can now be officially labeled a bust. He's buried 3rd on the depth chart behind John Engleberger and Moss is just ahead of him. He was inactive for the last game and will probably be gone by next year as just another draft mistake.

Jarvis Moss is being given more chances since he was not only a #1 pick, but Denver actually gave up a pick to trade up in the first round for him. But, being buried behind the extremely mediocre Engleberger is NOT encouraging for your 2nd year in the NFL.

He was inactive for 2 games and got into the Saints game, where he did nothing worth mentioning finishing with 1 tackle, no pressures and no sacks.

Still, they've invested a lot in him so he bears future watching. I'd say if he doesn't show any further development by next training camp he'll be cut or traded.

Dumervil is still the best Broncos front 7 player but he can't do it all by himself and he gets ZERO help from his teammates.

Considering all the endless ink/cyber space wasted on the DeWayne Robertson signing he's been undwhelming to say the least. 3 games. 3 tackles and is now listed as "probable" with an injured knee. Last year he had 57 tackles for the Jets and 4 sacks. At the rate he's going (barring injury which is already a problem) he'd get 16 tackles and no sacks. Not exactly what they were bargaining for when they signed him.

He looks like another candidate to be released next season, unless something major changes.

Unfortunately, Shanahan seems perfectly happy with this mess. I think he loves having a high powered offense and expects the defense to "make do" with cast-offs while he concentrates on the offense.

He actually wants to go back to the '05 defensive philosophy that hasn't worked at all for the last 8 years because "that's what we're familiar with."

Well, if it was broke 3 years ago, why haven't you fixed it by now? :coffee:

[Npba900]

Bring Back Collier!!!!! He's only 70 someting!

[MOtorboat]

http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2007/08/23/rubio24807_wideweb__470x311,0.jpg

[dogfish]

It seems like we've totally treaded water since 2005. The problem in 2005 with the blitzing defense is that good passing teams destroyed it. Mediocre teams with crappy QBs wilted under the pressure.

But, when you get to the playoffs EVERY team has a QB named Brady, Manning, Romo, Rivers, Roethlisberger, etc. Your chances or running up against a dud just aren't that great. Against the Patriots Denver got lucky. Brady's WRs really SUCKED that year and couldn't consistently make the adjustment, and Brady just had an off game. He missed some WIDE open WRs right down the middle of the field for easy TDs.



cug, you know i respect your opinions, and i certainly agree that we need to get better DLs-- i don't think that anyone's going to argue that point! but the above part i do disagree with. . . great QBs didn't "destroy us" in '05-- we beat brady twice, brees twice and mcnabb once-- eli was the best QB that beat us during the regular season. . . as for brady having an off game in the playoffs-- absolutely! that's the whole point of blitzing-- we MADE him have an off game! he missed those wide open receivers because he was under pressure and didn't have time to stand in the pocket all day making his reads. . . yes, the scheme did fail against pitt-- they drew up max-protect schemes to neutralize the blitz, and coyer didn't do anything to adjust. . . of course, it doesn't make things easier when your QB has about half-a-dozen turnovers, either. . . but i'll take the 16 points per game we were giving up that year over the 28 we're giving up this year one-hundred times out of one-hundred. . . it's all well and good to say that we need better DLs, but we certainly aren't getting any at this point. . . and in the meantime, we need to find a way to generate some pressure, and blitzing sure looks like the best option to me. . .

[Buff]

It seems like we've totally treaded water since 2005. The problem in 2005 with the blitzing defense is that good passing teams destroyed it. Mediocre teams with crappy QBs wilted under the pressure.

But, when you get to the playoffs EVERY team has a QB named Brady, Manning, Romo, Rivers, Roethlisberger, etc. Your chances or running up against a dud just aren't that great. Against the Patriots Denver got lucky. Brady's WRs really SUCKED that year and couldn't consistently make the adjustment, and Brady just had an off game. He missed some WIDE open WRs right down the middle of the field for easy TDs.

The Patriots should have had at least 2 more TDs that way and would have won that game.

Then Ben Roethlisberger didn't miss. The Broncos were crushed as big Ben never came off the field all day. He said after the game "we felt we could make the third down, no matter what the distance." And he was right.

Third and 13? No problem. Third and 18? The Broncos blitz and a Roethlisberger hits a wide open WR for 21 yards.

The problem is we've seen exactly the same thing this season. Every time the Broncos have tried to bring the blitz, they get picked up and the QB hits a wide-open WR for a big first down.

They can't stop anybody on 3rd down because they flat can't defend the pass.

And they can't defend the pass because their Safeties flat suck at pass-coverage. Manuel and McCree are just horrible in coverage.

The Broncos tried to go with all cast-offs and FAs this off-season and it's been a disaster. The secondary is just out-matched.

They got rid of Foxworth who was at least a decent nickel CB. Paymah is getting burned and the safeties are worse.

Short of trading for somebody new, I don't see this changing this season.

They need to start via FA and the draft and get a monster pass-rushing DT and two starting safeties.

This won't be easy. Drafting a top flight DL either requires a top 10 draft pick or else a lot of luck. In FA they command a HUGE contract and often underperform. It's just the hardest thing to find in the NFL outside of a franchise QB to get a top pass-rushing DL.

Meanwhile the Broncos DL acquisitions continue to underwhelm. Tim Crowder can now be officially labeled a bust. He's buried 3rd on the depth chart behind John Engleberger and Moss is just ahead of him. He was inactive for the last game and will probably be gone by next year as just another draft mistake.

Jarvis Moss is being given more chances since he was not only a #1 pick, but Denver actually gave up a pick to trade up in the first round for him. But, being buried behind the extremely mediocre Engleberger is NOT encouraging for your 2nd year in the NFL.

He was inactive for 2 games and got into the Saints game, where he did nothing worth mentioning finishing with 1 tackle, no pressures and no sacks.

Still, they've invested a lot in him so he bears future watching. I'd say if he doesn't show any further development by next training camp he'll be cut or traded.

Dumervil is still the best Broncos front 7 player but he can't do it all by himself and he gets ZERO help from his teammates.

Considering all the endless ink/cyber space wasted on the DeWayne Robertson signing he's been undwhelming to say the least. 3 games. 3 tackles and is now listed as "probable" with an injured knee. Last year he had 57 tackles for the Jets and 4 sacks. At the rate he's going (barring injury which is already a problem) he'd get 16 tackles and no sacks. Not exactly what they were bargaining for when they signed him.

He looks like another candidate to be released next season, unless something major changes.

Unfortunately, Shanahan seems perfectly happy with this mess. I think he loves having a high powered offense and expects the defense to "make do" with cast-offs while he concentrates on the offense.

He actually wants to go back to the '05 defensive philosophy that hasn't worked at all for the last 8 years because "that's what we're familiar with."

Well, if it was broke 3 years ago, why haven't you fixed it by now? :coffee:


Great breakdown of how we got to this point...

I think the most frustrating part is that we, along with Shanahan, realized after 2005 that we didn't have a "sustainable" defensive model. Meaning, as soon as we played a team that could max-protect well, with a QB that could pick apart coverage, we were exposed...

So then we tried to cut out all the blitzing the next year, and were left with games like Denver vs. Indy where Denver played its soft zone all game trying to take away the big play, only to get dinked and dunked all day for the loss...

So then fast forward to last year when they axe Coyer and try to bring in a Bates scheme that emphasizes pass-rush through the front-4. Great idea in theory until we discovered we didn't have the personnel or the patience for that scheme...

So, really, it's as if 2007 never happened from a defensive standpoint, and we're back in 2006, only with worse personnel because we cut/drafted players to fit the Bates scheme... Now we're left with the unenviable task, as you laid out, of trying to find a franchise DT as well as filling holes at safety, DE and MLB when this process should have been ongoing over the last 2 seasons.

[Mr D]

cug, you know i respect your opinions, and i certainly agree that we need to get better DLs-- i don't think that anyone's going to argue that point! but the above part i do disagree with. . . great QBs didn't "destroy us" in '05-- we beat brady twice, brees twice and mcnabb once-- eli was the best QB that beat us during the regular season. . . as for brady having an off game in the playoffs-- absolutely! that's the whole point of blitzing-- we MADE him have an off game! he missed those wide open receivers because he was under pressure and didn't have time to stand in the pocket all day making his reads. . . yes, the scheme did fail against pitt-- they drew up max-protect schemes to neutralize the blitz, and coyer didn't do anything to adjust. . . of course, it doesn't make things easier when your QB has about half-a-dozen turnovers, either. . . but i'll take the 16 points per game we were giving up that year over the 28 we're giving up this year one-hundred times out of one-hundred. . . it's all well and good to say that we need better DLs, but we certainly aren't getting any at this point. . . and in the meantime, we need to find a way to generate some pressure, and blitzing sure looks like the best option to me. . .

Blitzing or stunting our 4 DLs...moving them around and shifting them during the pre-snap, and running them across each other.

When we blitz, we don't have to bring 6 guys and leave 5 in coverage. We can just confuse the Oline by just maneuvering our guys pre-snap and bringing 4 or 5.

We just need to get creative is what I'm trying to say.

[Lonestar]

:laugh: Well, that was worth a laugh! Of course, they might have to mace some of the opposing WRs more than once!

I propose they let the opponent's best WR score a TD on the opening play, then pile on him in the end-zone and inject him with a sedative, just like in the movie M.A.S.H. The guy wobbles over to the sideline and is done for the game. :laugh:


I think he was talking about the other mace..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flail_(weapon)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mace_(club)

http://www.a2armory.com/medspikmac.html

http://www.a2armory.com/medar.html

more his time frame..

[Lonestar]

http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2007/08/23/rubio24807_wideweb__470x311,0.jpg

only our Olay defense does not have a sword..

Can you photo shop that out then we can send it to Pat as the new defensive motto..mastcott

That or will all chip in the send him an orange carpet/doormat..

[frenchfan]

In his press conference Shanahan said, "We have a philosophy here on defense that I would like to get back to a little bit, and Bob (Slowik) knows that philosophy. So that's why I think he will do a great job."

Does anyone know what he's referring to?Our D philosophy is pretty simple in fact : stay the less time possible on the field to give back the ball to Jay & co... With the D-line we have now, it's very efficient

:laugh:

just kidding...

[Superchop 7]

Our defensive philosophy ????

LIE.

Look Slowik, I read what you said about your philosophy.

Your a liar, you are not doing what you said you would.

So, I'll give you "our" philosophy.

We send 5, not four, on every play. (It's called a blitz, not a new concept, FYI, Boss would be my designated disruptor, he is "much" faster than I thought) The front four rush much harder when they get a little help.


We leave Champ on their ""best" player, I don't care if it's WR, TE, or RB. (Reggie Bush killed our linebackers)



We love man coverage, we love cover 1.


We 3 technique them to death.


You tried it your way, now try it ours.

We dictate on defense, we take away what they are able to do.

We put the Qb's head on a swivel by the end of the first quarter.

Get after them.

[lex]

Our approach to defense is not merely to let the other team eat us alive. Its to bathe ourselves in blood, chain ourselves to the bottom of a shark tank, and then, to watch them eat us alive.

[lex]

Blitzing or stunting our 4 DLs...moving them around and shifting them during the pre-snap, and running them across each other.

When we blitz, we don't have to bring 6 guys and leave 5 in coverage. We can just confuse the Oline by just maneuvering our guys pre-snap and bringing 4 or 5.

We just need to get creative is what I'm trying to say.

Smart man. Thats how a lot of sacks are generated. Theyre not all just beating the tackle in a simple one on one. Its no coincidence that one of the best in the business at blitzing generated enough pressure to get 6 sacks on Pittsburgh in one quarter. Nor do we have to do the same thing every time to get pressure. Quite the contrary. Its about confusing the Oline and confusing the QB. Doing the same thing everytime accomplishes the opposite.

[Acedude]

How can a D have a philosophy if the personnel are so lacking in playmaking ability? This current personnel couldn't make any D philosophy work, and they've tried them all at times in preseason and so far in three games. Getting ready to go more 3-4 now, I hear.

To me the bottom line is get some playmakers.

[Bronco9798]

We need a pass rush. We need someone to make some plays and apply pressure. It's frustrating watching QB's sit back there and pick us apart. Any QB can complete passes with the time we are allowing. I sure hope we don't make Huard look like an all-pro Sunday. Going into Arrowhead and playing is always tough. We can't let them hang around and get any confidence. I know the Chiefs suck and are in total disarray, but letting them hang around won't be good. We need to get a big lead and control the clock.

[SmilinAssasSin27]

Agreed. I was hoping KC would wait 1 more week to start Huard, but no luck. We REALLY need to get after him. I don't care who we send. Heck...put in Woodyard and see if he can get to the QB. We have to try something different.

[Superchop 7]

Yes Broncos, I saw CBS analysis tonight.

They said the "strength" of the defense is the linebackers. ( Sorry Champ and Dre )

Said blitzing doesn't work.





Tell em thanks,

I haven't laughed like that in years.

(keep in mind that CBS is the "home" of the Bronco's)



let me tell YOU something,

Bree's converted 80% of his passes.


I think that has happened only 5 times in the Superbowl era.

Thats how lousy the pressure on Bree's was.





Get back to Bronco football,

Stop getting your media buddies to try and manipulate the fans.

We know better.

[dogfish]

are you kidding??

they said blitzing doesn't work? who the **** said that?


obviously they didn't watch the philly game where they sacked roethlisberger EIGHT times. . . maybe slowik just has shitty, predictable blitz schemes. . . but if they think dropping into soft zones does work, maybe they need to take a closer look at the five hundred freakin' yards and thirty-two points we gave up last week! yea, it was a win-- but that's solely on the O. . . their one or two little stops don't count for jack if the O isn't lights out once again. . .

blitzing doesn't work my ass!

[G_Money]

On this defensive thing, dogfish, you can stand in for me any time. :salute: I'll just co-sign.

It'll be much easier on everyone - your posts are more condensed than mine anyway. Joe will appreciate that, wherever he is. ;)

If you're gonna have a team that might stop the run with the front 4 eventually but will rarely get to the QB then you'd BETTER blitz. Taking more guys OFF the line and dropping them into coverage is not the answer, geez...

~G

[dogfish]

lol. . . thanks G!


:beer:


i'm still not exactly as concise as joe, but then who is?

[EastCoastBronco]

We've got the same kind of high octane offence we had in '96, '97, '98 so lets bring back the DC we had then...Is Greg Robinson out there anywhere?

[Reidman]

In light of this offense, I think we forget that our D did get a TD off that fumble last week. Of course one shining moment doesn't take away from the fact that we still need serious help...also, I watched the game last night and didn't realize we actually got a sack...how did this happen...!?;)

[G_Money]

Slowik runs a blitz scheme. Some of it's zone, some of it's edge w/ DBs, but his preferred method of attack is the blitz. He'll do it vs. both the run and the pass. He also lets his linemen stunt far more than we've seen the last coupla years, which will leave running gaps if done at the wrong time.

LB play is absolutely crucial in his defense, both to clean up after failed stunts open running lanes and to get to the QB on delayed blitzes, as well as in pass coverage responsibilities (because a blitzing team is very succeptible to the screen and short-pass game - if those LBs don't tackle 5 yard passes go for 30 yards).

Slowik is more of an 8-man box guy, which Shanny prefers, but his 8-man box didn't stop anybody when he was in GB. Their run D was inconsistent, and their ability to get to the QB was atrocious. He's also not a guy who gets lots of turnovers, which is somewhat odd for a blitz defense.

Things you need to be successful in the theoretical Slowik D:

- DBs who can cover. We are gonna play a lot of man coverage, so they'd better be able to handle their responsibilities. We should be fine in this at least, provided we can find a cover safety somewhere. They also need to tackle, because if they whiff it's 6 points. So when Bly goes for a pick he'd better get it.

- LBs who can tackle. There's a lot of open field when extra men are tearing after the QB, so if the ball-carrier comes your way you'd better be able to get to him and put him on the turf. With Gold theoretically out of the picture, we should improve here, and a possible LB in the draft would help too. It's also good if they're fast, so that he has multiple LB options when calling blitzes, and once again - when you get to the QB, TACKLE HIM.

- Mobile DL. Ends and tackles will drop into coverage as the zone-blitzing scheme takes over, so you need guys who can at least fill passing lanes. They also will be stunting and running around rather than just occupying their blockers. Our DL is faster than it is big, so this should be fine.

- Offense that can score. A blitzing D will give up touchdowns. It just happens. When there are 8 guys in the box, then it naturally follows that once you get out of the box there are only 3 men between you and the goal line. We're gonna need to get better in the red zone to cover for TD mistaks by our newly-aggressive defense.

Positives:

- Our personnel is MUCH better suited for this style of D. Our DTs are mobile, our DL are pass-rushers (especially Doom), our LBs (sans Gold) are fast, our corners can handle man-on-man. These are all positives for the Slowik D. In the Bates Scheme our DTs were too small, our LBs didn't fill gaps, and our corners' coverage abilities were wasted. Marcus Thomas especially should reap immediate benefits from a scheme that lets him get upfield.

- More than one Bronco has apparently said that Slowik taking over was something that should have happened last year. Bates and Slowik...mmm...didn't exactly share in the DC duties - even though Bob was DC in name it was name-only. He hung out with the DBs, coached them up, and let Bates be hoisted by his own petard.

- Our main success on D came with Atwater playing roving run-support and with our team pinning its ears back and going after the QB. And after watching both Coyer and Bates get run out of town using schemes that ignored the blitz (strangely in Larry's case, since he blitzed before) I'm more than ready to see QB pressure brought again.

Negatives:

- We have a lot of young players who will now be on what is essentially their 3rd scheme in 3 years, whether they were in college or dealing with the Coyer/Bates/Slowik revolving door on the Broncos. I don't know how fast they will pick it up, and according to them they NEVER picked up the Bates Scheme enough to truly be effective with it the whole time he was here. How long will they need to get the hang of Slowik's?

- Slowik has been wishy-washy about his scheme. He abandoned the blitz in GB after getting torched early in the season, and never really recovered. Owens and the Eagles utterly crushed the bland zone he ran out there in the playoff game at the end of the '04 season, and after a terrible season that game was the cherry on top that got him fired. Not only is it hard to pick up new schemes, but if the coordinator isn't fully behind it that makes it even harder.

- Slowik's version of the blitz scheme has never really been shown to be successful. He was on Dave W.'s staff at Chicago, and they never got it done. His one year w/ Cleveland they were the worst in the league, but then they were an expansion team so they should have been. And at GB his job was so underwhelming he was 1-and-done again. Is the 4th time the charm?

I guess we get several months to dream that it is before we start seeing it implemented and have our opinions informed by some more recent facts.

~G

*sighs*

So we didn't blitz, he didn't stunt, we didn't get a cover safety, Thomas didn't get upfield, our LBs couldn't tackle, and we played not to get beat deep all year while never pressuring the QB or getting turnovers.

All the things I hoped he would do he didn't do. All of the things I was afraid he was gonna do he did A LOT.

Guess there was really no point in hoping he'd learned something in the years since his last job. :coffee:

~G

[Tned]

*sighs*

So we didn't blitz, he didn't stunt, we didn't get a cover safety, Thomas didn't get upfield, our LBs couldn't tackle, and we played not to get beat deep all year while never pressuring the QB or getting turnovers.

All the things I hoped he would do he didn't do. All of the things I was afraid he was gonna do he did A LOT.

Guess there was really no point in hoping he'd learned something in the years since his last job. :coffee:

~G

Maybe along with the lack of talent at many positions (cast offs and special teamers), one of your concerns (negatives) was a factor:


We have a lot of young players who will now be on what is essentially their 3rd scheme in 3 years, whether they were in college or dealing with the Coyer/Bates/Slowik revolving door on the Broncos. I don't know how fast they will pick it up, and according to them they NEVER picked up the Bates Scheme enough to truly be effective with it the whole time he was here. How long will they need to get the hang of Slowik's?


I'm sure that is what Shanahan/Bowlen had to or have to weigh now. Is it wise to put these young players through their fourth scheme in four years...

[Fan in Exile]

I wouldn't say that we've got cast-offs at a lot of positions though.
Crowder had a pretty good year last year, he should have made some kind of leap this year.
Moss hasn't learned any new moves but there was a reason that he was a first round pick.
Thomas has been good but still hasn't developed.
Robertson was supposed to be revitalized by the shift in defensive schemes, and we weren't the only team looking at him.
The guy that we ended up having start at end were rotational guys, but that's because we couldn't get our investment to pay off.

Williams isn't a cast-off.
Koutivides was supposed to be almost as good as Lofa Tatupu which means he should have started.
Boss was doing well until his injury
Mcree and Manuel were journey who tanked here big time.
Bly and Bailey are pro-bowlers

My point is that conventional wisdom at the start of the year said that we had a pretty solid foundation for a good D. They had players that more than one team really liked, so if it's this bad there's got be a coaching/front office problem. Blaming the talent IMO is just an excuse that people are telling themselves so that they have hope for next year.

If all the pieces that we brought in last year couldn't fix it, I have no hope that the ones we bring in this year will change it there will just be a lot more finger pointing and calling people scrubs.

[Northman]

are you kidding??

they said blitzing doesn't work? who the **** said that?


obviously they didn't watch the philly game where they sacked roethlisberger EIGHT times. . . maybe slowik just has shitty, predictable blitz schemes. . . but if they think dropping into soft zones does work, maybe they need to take a closer look at the five hundred freakin' yards and thirty-two points we gave up last week! yea, it was a win-- but that's solely on the O. . . their one or two little stops don't count for jack if the O isn't lights out once again. . .

blitzing doesn't work my ass!


No kidding. Blitzing works you just need to know how to utilize and be creative with it. Baltimore did a lot of different blitz packages against Dallas especially late in the game when the Cowboys started to get back in it. Even though it was the offense that eventually put it away it didnt stop Bmore from trying to confuse and put pressure on Romo. In our case, you cant just run the guys in the same formation or from the same side every time. You have to get creative with it and actually earn your paycheck.

[BroncosRockdaRockies]

are you kidding??

they said blitzing doesn't work? who the **** said that?


obviously they didn't watch the philly game where they sacked roethlisberger EIGHT times. . . maybe slowik just has shitty, predictable blitz schemes. . . but if they think dropping into soft zones does work, maybe they need to take a closer look at the five hundred freakin' yards and thirty-two points we gave up last week! yea, it was a win-- but that's solely on the O. . . their one or two little stops don't count for jack if the O isn't lights out once again. . .

blitzing doesn't work my ass!

Or maybe pittsburg has a chitty O-Line? I dunno I think it possibly couldv'e been a year for the Offensive Lines due to the amount of sacks we didn't give up? Who is to say they just didn't face alot of good Offenses? I mean We truly need some players but I don't think we are as bad off as everyone thinks.

Although the toughness is not there in the backfields hardly any good hits from the secondary and that is really disapointing. I am always looking for that player that provides hits like we have seen in the past by players like Smith,Atwater and yes even Romanowski before he turned Raiderish he layed many hits. The Toughness is missing. Some of the best Defenses we saw were when we wore the Orange Jerseys! just sayin Bring Back the Orange basically!

[G_Money]

If it was a problem understanding the scheme, Tned, it should have started to resolve itself over the course of the year. Sure, you might start off giving up a ton of yards and points, but as your grasp on the scheme gets better your mistakes should decrease. That didn’t happen. So either we simply do not have professional-level talent on the D (which is certainly possible) or it was a bad scheme.

I was looking forward to seeing someone else come in here and find that out. Now it looks like we’ll get another chance to see if Slowik’s history of ineptitude repeats itself in 09.

I just wish I could ask him some questions.

“Why did we play all year with such big cushions leaving the underneath throws wide open? Was it because we couldn’t get pressure that you went to that weird sort of prevent D that prevented absolutely nothing?”

“Why is it that we blitzed so little, and that when we did blitz it was picked up 100% of the time? Are your blitzers just terrible or did you fail to instruct them?”

“Dumervil got far less pressure than last year. He’s never been great at consistent pressure, but this year the sacks just weren’t there. Did you try to do anything different with him to help him out?”

“Why did Webster keep his starting job for every game he was healthy? Was it because you didn’t want to go with a rookie in the middle, was Larsen a failure in practice, what?”

“What made you pick up safeties who couldn’t cover, but who you refused to blitz either? If we were gonna be a coverage DB unit, then why not play some corners at safety to at least get some speed and play recognition back there?”

“Would you mind bending over so I can slam you in the back of the head repeatedly with this shovel?”

So many questions…

Our steadfast refusal to blitz and total inability to get any pressure on the QB made us the proverbial one-legged man in an ass-kicking contest.

Teams with our kind of DL blitz to force the issue on the QB. We couldn’t or wouldn’t do it.

And so we wound up playing a weird Cover-1 Prevent zone for a lot of the year, and it destroyed us.

If it hadn’t happened in GB almost the exact same way I might imagine something could be done about this, but GB fans remember this all too well. They set records for atrocity and promptly fired him.

He’s been a large part of the worst pair of defensive efforts in 40+ years here, and we gave him another year to prove himself?

Ouch.

~G

[Tned]

I wouldn't say that we've got cast-offs at a lot of positions though.
Crowder had a pretty good year last year, he should have made some kind of leap this year.
Moss hasn't learned any new moves but there was a reason that he was a first round pick.
Thomas has been good but still hasn't developed.
Robertson was supposed to be revitalized by the shift in defensive schemes, and we weren't the only team looking at him.
The guy that we ended up having start at end were rotational guys, but that's because we couldn't get our investment to pay off.

Williams isn't a cast-off.
Koutivides was supposed to be almost as good as Lofa Tatupu which means he should have started.
Boss was doing well until his injury
Mcree and Manuel were journey who tanked here big time.
Bly and Bailey are pro-bowlers

My point is that conventional wisdom at the start of the year said that we had a pretty solid foundation for a good D. They had players that more than one team really liked, so if it's this bad there's got be a coaching/front office problem. Blaming the talent IMO is just an excuse that people are telling themselves so that they have hope for next year.

If all the pieces that we brought in last year couldn't fix it, I have no hope that the ones we bring in this year will change it there will just be a lot more finger pointing and calling people scrubs.

I don't disagree with your line comments.

But, at safety, as you say, they are journeyman players and the Denver was already being talked about having the worse cover safeties before the season even started.

At MLB, Webster was a career special team, that becomes a starter. Boss never lived up to early hype about him (in Detroit if I remember) and was oft injured, which occurred again here (I thought he looked solid early in the year).

Dumervil and Engleberger, who were the primary DE starters most of the year (which of course a rotation behind them) were innefective against the run and pass. It seemed most of the time we got penetration, it was from Ekuban, either from the end spot or a DT spot.

So, again, I say we need:
an MLB
an SLB
SS
FS
DE (at least one, every down beast - pass/rush).

Now, it is possible that the MLB spot could be filled by Larsen, or that DJ could move back to the middle and Woodyard play the WLB. I'm not sure about the SLB. Conventional wisdom says you want a bigger player there, but Boss was a smallish/fash guy.

At safety, lets assume that Barrett plays one of the spots.

So, in best case, we pick a DE in the first round, or hopefully, get a beast DE in trade or FA, and then still possibly draft one on the first day. Ideally, if we don't draft a DE with the first pick, we draft a stud MLB, and a safety, along with possibly picking up a solid safety in FA.

We don't need to fill 11 spots, we need to fill 5 spots, maybe 7 if we won't to fill both safety and DE spots, but I assume we will use some in house talent, like Barrett, and possibly woodyard and/or Larsen, so we have 5-7 spots, but will likely only need 3-5 playmakers to turn the defense around.

[Mike]

Maybe along with the lack of talent at many positions (cast offs and special teamers), one of your concerns (negatives) was a factor:



I'm sure that is what Shanahan/Bowlen had to or have to weigh now. Is it wise to put these young players through their fourth scheme in four years...

Honest question for you defensive knowledgeable folks. What scheme has Slowick employed this year? Is there a foundation that he laid this year that carries over to next? To me ( I admit that I know nothing concerning schemes), it seems that he never stuck to one scheme. If he didn't lay the foundation for a scheme then are the players really adversely affected if he is removed?

[G_Money]

There’s no scheme, Mike, just a mishmash of wishes and prayers.

In theory, Slowik’s scheme as related to us this year is to play 8 in the box to stop the run and the short passes, leave a cover safety deep to help on long-balls, and man up on the corners while allowing the DL alone to pressure the QB, with the odd 5th man blitzer.

At times he’ll zone blitz and drop a DL into coverage while a LB rushes the passer, but I don’t think that worked once all season.

But our gap control is a joke, as LBs don’t fill their responsibilities fast enough and rushers gash us for their yards pretty easily. Our outside containment is non-existent, partly because our tiny DL can’t hold against the large OTs, forcing the tiny LBs to try to help out – which means all of them sell out to get to that side of the field and forget about reverses or change of direction.

Our corners play 15 yards off the LOS because the throw won’t be hurried and they can’t stay in bump-and-run man for as long as the QB will have to throw the ball, so we wind up playing a de-facto zone even though it’s primarily a man scheme. LBs fall back if it’s within 15 yards, and DBs cover the deeper routes. Another reason Slowik refuses to blitz the LBs: if he blitzes them and they don’t get there it’s an auto completion with as far off the ball as the corners play. Why he won’t sometimes play press is beyond me, but it’s what he does.

It’s kinda a mess, and will need some VERY talented players to make it at all effective.

So here’s hoping for some very talented player additions, I guess.

~G

[Tned]

If it was a problem understanding the scheme, Tned, it should have started to resolve itself over the course of the year. Sure, you might start off giving up a ton of yards and points, but as your grasp on the scheme gets better your mistakes should decrease. That didn’t happen. So either we simply do not have professional-level talent on the D (which is certainly possible) or it was a bad scheme.

I saw a defense that got better as the year went on, 'except' for giving up the big play. Look at the Carolina game. Except for Williams one run, Stewart and Williams were held to around 3 YPC, when all the experts looked for another 300 yard outing from them.

More times than not, we saw a guy miss a tackle in the backfield, or get beat just past the line of scrimmage.

You know as well as I, that a lot of times, if one person blows his responsibility, or whiffs on a tackle, it can turn into a big play.


“Why did we play all year with such big cushions leaving the underneath throws wide open? Was it because we couldn’t get pressure that you went to that weird sort of prevent D that prevented absolutely nothing?”

I would love to know the answer as well. I suspect it was twofold.

First, that we were typically playing one safety to stop the run, and our second safety was not a solid cover safety, and we were playing a 'keep the play in front of us' defense.

Also, I heard/read Champ discuss this at one time, and he talked about how it gave the ability to have time to read run or pass, so that the corners could help in the run game. The down side to this is that they often bit on the play fake, which if they were in bump coverage, would not have happened, as they would immediately be running with the receiver.


“Why is it that we blitzed so little, and that when we did blitz it was picked up 100% of the time? Are your blitzers just terrible or did you fail to instruct them?”

Well, I think the fact they were picked up had much to do with why they weren't run. It seemed the only effective blitzes were the highest riks, which were the corner blitzes. I think this comes down to the D-line getting no penetration or sucking up double teams, so that when we did blitz, they got clogged up in the muddle of the non-penetrated offensive line, or were picked up by an RB or TE.

Get one beast DE that commands double teams on every play, and now the other three guys can create some seperation/penetration to have the blitz effective.

When you consider the blitz was unaffective, then the blitz is the worst thing you can do, as if they run against it big gains can be had, not to mention screen passes and long passes, due to our lack of pass rush.


“Dumervil got far less pressure than last year. He’s never been great at consistent pressure, but this year the sacks just weren’t there. Did you try to do anything different with him to help him out?”

Good question. Or, did Doom simply have a down year? Was he playing with an injury? Did a full year of film on him, lead to easy defense because he only has the outside speed rush move?


“Why did Webster keep his starting job for every game he was healthy? Was it because you didn’t want to go with a rookie in the middle, was Larsen a failure in practice, what?”

Again, good questions. Was it because Denver felt the greater need was for him to practice at FB? Was it because while he looked good in his limited play, when breaking down the game film, was he more often than not, making the wrong read, missing his responsibility? Is it that in practice, he didn't appear to fully grasp the playbook?

Like when Shanahan was talking about Barrett, he said that different players 'pickup' the playbook (paraphrasing) quicker or slower than others, and you have to make a determination as to when they know enough to make a contribution on the field. In barretts case, he said, maybe he waited too long. Could be the situation with Larsen is that since he spent so much time on FB, that they didn't feel he would be in the right spot to cover his responsibilities, even if he would do a better job when he made contact.

Or, what we don't see in practice showed that Larsen wasn't ready. We will likely never know the answer to this, or any of the other questions.


“What made you pick up safeties who couldn’t cover, but who you refused to blitz either? If we were gonna be a coverage DB unit, then why not play some corners at safety to at least get some speed and play recognition back there?”

Maybe with Bowlen firing mail sorters, and other people in the front office to cut costs, it is possible that moves were made on a budget this year. Maybe they thought that the line would create more pressure, which would put 'lessl' pressure on the deep safety.

Maybe Goodman and Shanahan made the personell moves and left Slowick to figure out how to make it work.

[yardog]

If it was a problem understanding the scheme, Tned, it should have started to resolve itself over the course of the year. Sure, you might start off giving up a ton of yards and points, but as your grasp on the scheme gets better your mistakes should decrease. That didn’t happen. So either we simply do not have professional-level talent on the D (which is certainly possible) or it was a bad scheme.

I was looking forward to seeing someone else come in here and find that out. Now it looks like we’ll get another chance to see if Slowik’s history of ineptitude repeats itself in 09.

I just wish I could ask him some questions.

“Why did we play all year with such big cushions leaving the underneath throws wide open? Was it because we couldn’t get pressure that you went to that weird sort of prevent D that prevented absolutely nothing?”

“Why is it that we blitzed so little, and that when we did blitz it was picked up 100% of the time? Are your blitzers just terrible or did you fail to instruct them?”

“Dumervil got far less pressure than last year. He’s never been great at consistent pressure, but this year the sacks just weren’t there. Did you try to do anything different with him to help him out?”

“Why did Webster keep his starting job for every game he was healthy? Was it because you didn’t want to go with a rookie in the middle, was Larsen a failure in practice, what?”

“What made you pick up safeties who couldn’t cover, but who you refused to blitz either? If we were gonna be a coverage DB unit, then why not play some corners at safety to at least get some speed and play recognition back there?”

“Would you mind bending over so I can slam you in the back of the head repeatedly with this shovel?”
So many questions…

Our steadfast refusal to blitz and total inability to get any pressure on the QB made us the proverbial one-legged man in an ass-kicking contest.

Teams with our kind of DL blitz to force the issue on the QB. We couldn’t or wouldn’t do it.

And so we wound up playing a weird Cover-1 Prevent zone for a lot of the year, and it destroyed us.

If it hadn’t happened in GB almost the exact same way I might imagine something could be done about this, but GB fans remember this all too well. They set records for atrocity and promptly fired him.

He’s been a large part of the worst pair of defensive efforts in 40+ years here, and we gave him another year to prove himself?

Ouch.

~G

This the only question from me.

[LRtagger]

If it hadn’t happened in GB almost the exact same way I might imagine something could be done about this, but GB fans remember this all too well. They set records for atrocity and promptly fired him.



And then promptly turned their entire defense around the very next year (into a top 10 unit).

How good could this team really be with a top 10 defense? Unfortunately, we will not be finding out anytime soon if we keep giving Slowik chances.

[Fan in Exile]

I don't disagree with your line comments.

But, at safety, as you say, they are journeyman players and the Denver was already being talked about having the worse cover safeties before the season even started.

At MLB, Webster was a career special team, that becomes a starter. Boss never lived up to early hype about him (in Detroit if I remember) and was oft injured, which occurred again here (I thought he looked solid early in the year).

Dumervil and Engleberger, who were the primary DE starters most of the year (which of course a rotation behind them) were innefective against the run and pass. It seemed most of the time we got penetration, it was from Ekuban, either from the end spot or a DT spot.

So, again, I say we need:
an MLB
an SLB
SS
FS
DE (at least one, every down beast - pass/rush).

Now, it is possible that the MLB spot could be filled by Larsen, or that DJ could move back to the middle and Woodyard play the WLB. I'm not sure about the SLB. Conventional wisdom says you want a bigger player there, but Boss was a smallish/fash guy.

At safety, lets assume that Barrett plays one of the spots.

So, in best case, we pick a DE in the first round, or hopefully, get a beast DE in trade or FA, and then still possibly draft one on the first day. Ideally, if we don't draft a DE with the first pick, we draft a stud MLB, and a safety, along with possibly picking up a solid safety in FA.

We don't need to fill 11 spots, we need to fill 5 spots, maybe 7 if we won't to fill both safety and DE spots, but I assume we will use some in house talent, like Barrett, and possibly woodyard and/or Larsen, so we have 5-7 spots, but will likely only need 3-5 playmakers to turn the defense around.

This is kind of my point Tned, those are the same spots that we filled last year. When you miss on a couple of players that you bring in you can blame the guys, when you miss on all of them then you blame the guys in charge.

I think with our d-line especially, we've brought in enough guys at this point that we have to blame the coaching.

I'm all for bringing in new talent as well, but I think that we've got to make sure we have someone good building the D, and that isn't Slowick.