Thread: An honest question I have for my fellow Bronco fans

First off, this is not just another ski is falling, rant thread we see after each loss. It is an honest question I have for you, one I have been asking myself for the last couple years now.

I’m sure the loss today had something to do with this question making its rounds again. However, I want to point out, I felt we had a chance to win today, but I also knew we would have to overcome a lot to do so. That being said, the loss wasn’t unsuspected.

Even though the odds were we were going to lose today, something is still troubling me. I have stated in the past how I feel about Slowik and his ridicules schemes. But it’s not that. I mean we all knew going in, our D wasn’t going to stop them. Our D wasn’t going to win us the game. The Best we could hope for out of our D was to show up, fight hard and give our offense a chance to win the game. For the most part didn’t they do that?

I am not that disappointed in our defense today, maybe it’s just because I have grown accustom, to accepting their not very good. What I am disappointed in, is our offense.

It just feels like it doesn’t have to be this way. Do you know what I mean? We have talent on our offense. How can we have so much talent and be so flat? I’m not just talking about the individual play either. The entire game plan just seems flat to me. It’s basic to the core. It’s like there is very little planning/scheming involved. We send guys on individual routs and expect they will get open. We do not get open guys because our scheme has set it up. When someone is open, it’s because the receiver just beat his man or he wasn’t open at all and Cutler just made an amazing throw.

Where is the planning, the creativity? Really think about this, when was the last time we had an offensive game plan that was set up based on our opponent’s weakness? A game plan that didn’t solely revolve around the bootleg?

I truly believe we have way too much talent on offense to ever be stopped/shut down. Yet this seems to be the case more then half the time, just about every time the defense stops our bootlegs, our offensive scheme has nothing to offer.

I know cutler threw an INT to a covered guy, but do you really believe that is the problem with our offense? Isn’t that the real problem with our pocket passing scheme, there are no open guys? I mean really open. How can a defense cover all our receiving threats? How can they double Marshall every play, and someone not be wide open? It’s like they have 20 guys on the field. When we try and double a WR, there are always guys wide open. Hell, half the time, as in the case today, the doubled guy is wide open. So what gives? Why do other defenses make it look so easy to stop our 4 viable receiving threats and we make it look so hard to stop their 1? Seriously?

I’m not saying I have the answer. But clearly there has to be one. For instance, we couldn’t even cover Carolinas' 1 receiving threat. Imagine what they would have done to us if they had our 4. There would have been 2 or 3 guys running wide open on every play.

Why can’t Shanahan devise a plan to get at least one of our guys open? I see it all the time with other teams. The defender doesn’t have to fall down to get a guy open.

I guess that brings me to my question.

Do you still believe in Shanahans ability to put a creative offensive scheme together? One that actually works and don’t require 5 + successful bootlegs to be affective. I have always held Shanahan among the best offensive minds in the game. But I am not seeing that from our offense on Sundays, to tell you the truth, I haven’t seen that in a long time.

Is it just me? Are there open guys and Cutler just isn’t finding them?

In closing,

I’m not calling for Shanahans head, but I have lost a lot of faith in his offensive creativity. At one point I felt he could take less talent on offense and get more out of it then just about anyone, lately it seems we have as much talent on offense as anyone and are getting far less production then teams with less talent.

I think a lot of our inept offense is the lack of a quality running back. Without that it forces us to be one dimensional. This has been a problem since most of our running backs have gone down. We don't have a definite starter going into next year either.

I believe we can thank Shanahan for making this offense what it is minus 700 running backs. To think "he's lost all creativity" is absurd. He has no room to be creative with a one-dimensional attack.

The lack of a between the tackles running threat allows the defenses we face to play against the pass. Combine that with an offense that leans on play action and it's tough. Our pass/run playcalling was lopsided, and we couldn't rely on the run. Our runs up until the end of the fourth quarter were 2-5 yards, and we could never establish the run. It was run to keep the defense a little bit honest and set up the play action, but we never convinced them that we could just run the ball all day. As good as Jay is at finding the open man, as good as the line is at protecting Jay, as good as Jay is at avoiding the sack, and as good as the receivers are--it's not enough to keep drives going unless we have a credible rushing attack. Plus, Carolina played defense well, especially getting pressure on Jay and making him uncomfortable and hurried.

Originally Posted by JKcatch724

I believe we can thank Shanahan for making this offense what it is minus 700 running backs. To think "he's lost all creativity" is absurd. He has no room to be creative with a one-dimensional attack.

I'm talking about creativity in our passing game, The Colts had a one dimensional attack for years and they still managed to have open guys. They didn't win the SB until they got a running game. I'm not talking about being good enough to win the SB with a one dimensional passing attack.

There is a big difference between that and being able to put a pocket passing scheme together that actually works.

Originally Posted by Hawgdriver

The lack of a between the tackles running threat allows the defenses we face to play against the pass. Combine that with an offense that leans on play action and it's tough. Our pass/run playcalling was lopsided, and we couldn't rely on the run. Our runs up until the end of the fourth quarter were 2-5 yards, and we could never establish the run. It was run to keep the defense a little bit honest and set up the play action, but we never convinced them that we could just run the ball all day. As good as Jay is at finding the open man, as good as the line is at protecting Jay, as good as Jay is at avoiding the sack, and as good as the receivers are--it's not enough to keep drives going unless we have a credible rushing attack. Plus, Carolina played defense well, especially getting pressure on Jay and making him uncomfortable and hurried.

I understand our troubles with running the ball, I also know the affect it has on the passing game. That really goes to the heart of my question, do you believe Shanahan can put a successful passing scheme together, that don't revolve around our ability to run the ball?

Up until this point, all the success Shanahan schemes has had passing the ball has come of the run. Everything comes off the play action and bootleg. That is not a drop back pocket passing scheme. When the run goes, so does the play action and bootleg, If we can't play action and bootleg, we don't have success passing the ball.

Originally Posted by fcspikeit

I'm talking about creativity in our passing game, The Colts had a one dimensional attack for years and they still managed to have open guys. They didn't win the SB until they got a running game. I'm not talking about being good enough to win the SB with a one dimensional passing attack.

There is a big difference between that and being able to put a pocket passing scheme together that actually works.

The Colts had Edgerrin James during those years, though. It's a little different when you've got Tatum Bell in the backfield. I can't honestly think of a team that has a less-feared running attack than us.

You know who would be great right now (haters)? Clinton.

I think Cutler makes our team look a lot better than they actually are.

We are a team that passes to set up the run. Until that changes, expect teams to key in on the pass and expect Jay to have to continue squeezing the ball into tight holes.

I am confident in Shanahan's football mind and his ability to lead this team and this organization, though.

I agree with everybody about the running game issues.

We can’t get tough yards on the ground without Hillis (and earlier in the year, Pittman) so it’s hard to sustain drives against decent defenses.

We also play a lot out of the shotgun, which makes your running game basically a draw attack if you have one at all.

I worry more about that. Even if we get another good runner in here to pair with a fully-healthy Hillis (see what I’m doing there? Speaking truth into existence. Come back really healthy, Peyton…) we’re gonna have trouble running an offense from the shotgun all the time.

It’s great for Jay. No dropping back to pass, no fumbling the snap from center at least once a game, he can see the whole field instantly…

But our running attack is what keyed our SB runs. Going up on the other team BIG before half-time with a high-powered offense, and then grinding out 10 minute drives in the 2nd half to absolutely kill the clock while we blitzed the bajeezus out of people.

That’s not the only way to win, but it is the way Shanahan has demonstrated he CAN win in the playoffs.

Absolutely dominant running attack + great passing weapons + good play-calling + rocket-armed QB making decent decisions + attacking defense = Broncos Championships.

That’s the way we know how to do it.

And for all our success in the draft the last 3 years, here’s our current equation:

Mediocre running attack with beatup backs + great passing weapons + mediocre play-calling + rocket-armed QB starting to make better decisions + bent-over defense = dogfight to finish above .500 and win the pathetic AFC West.

We’ve still got work to do – and I hope Shanahan realizes it. Coaching needs to get better. Playcalling needs to get better. Talent still needs to get better, at least at RB and on D.

For where we're at in the rebuild (since we apparently thought 2006 was gonna be a championship and we didn’t need any players in 2007) that’s not a terrible equation thus far.

It just won’t cut it for hoisting the trophy. As long as we remember what it’s like to have a dominant running attack and Cutler isn’t so fascinated with 4000 yards through the air that he can suffer through 2200+ yards on the ground and some extra victories, we’ll be okay on offense. I hope we don’t use injuries to our mostly-mediocre RB corps as an excuse for why we don’t even have a shadow of our former glory on the ground. Even if healthy Hall, Pittman and Young weren’t bringing home a championship as our running game.

Shanny has to know that, right?

*crosses fingers*

~G

Originally Posted by G_Money

I agree with everybody about the running game issues.

We can’t get tough yards on the ground without Hillis (and earlier in the year, Pittman) so it’s hard to sustain drives against decent defenses.

We also play a lot out of the shotgun, which makes your running game basically a draw attack if you have one at all.

I worry more about that. Even if we get another good runner in here to pair with a fully-healthy Hillis (see what I’m doing there? Speaking truth into existence. Come back really healthy, Peyton…) we’re gonna have trouble running an offense from the shotgun all the time.

It’s great for Jay. No dropping back to pass, no fumbling the snap from center at least once a game, he can see the whole field instantly…

But our running attack is what keyed our SB runs. Going up on the other team BIG before half-time with a high-powered offense, and then grinding out 10 minute drives in the 2nd half to absolutely kill the clock while we blitzed the bajeezus out of people.

That’s not the only way to win, but it is the way Shanahan has demonstrated he CAN win in the playoffs.

Absolutely dominant running attack + great passing weapons + good play-calling + rocket-armed QB making decent decisions + attacking defense = Broncos Championships.

That’s the way we know how to do it.

And for all our success in the draft the last 3 years, here’s our current equation:

Mediocre running attack with beatup backs + great passing weapons + mediocre play-calling + rocket-armed QB starting to make better decisions + bent-over defense = dogfight to finish above .500 and win the pathetic AFC West.

We’ve still got work to do – and I hope Shanahan realizes it. Coaching needs to get better. Playcalling needs to get better. Talent still needs to get better, at least at RB and on D.

For where we're at in the rebuild (since we apparently thought 2006 was gonna be a championship and we didn’t need any players in 2007) that’s not a terrible equation thus far.

It just won’t cut it for hoisting the trophy. As long as we remember what it’s like to have a dominant running attack and Cutler isn’t so fascinated with 4000 yards through the air that he can suffer through 2200+ yards on the ground and some extra victories, we’ll be okay on offense. I hope we don’t use injuries to our mostly-mediocre RB corps as an excuse for why we don’t even have a shadow of our former glory on the ground. Even if healthy Hall, Pittman and Young weren’t bringing home a championship as our running game.

Shanny has to know that, right?

*crosses fingers*

~G

G, again you make good points, everyone who has posted so far has made good points. I don't disagree, And I know the affect not being able to run the ball has on an offense. Especially a Shanahan ran offense.

Still, something doesn't feel right. When I watch the games it just seems like we could be doing more with what we have now. Do you agree with that? Or do you feel we are getting all we can out of the 11 guys we have and nothing can be done to improve our offense until we get some more pieces.

I realize there is no way Shanahan could, can put a winning scheme together for every single game. The other 31 coaches in the league get paid too and a lot of them have more to work with at this time. So I don't expect us to never hit bumps in the road.

The problem I have is, we only seem to have 1 formula for success. If the other team can stop our run and therefore take away the play action and boots they will stop our offense. Does it have to be that way? If a team is set on stopping one thing, can't we come up with something else that will take advantage of them gearing to stop the play action?

In you opinion is there no way of running a successful scheme without a dominant run game?

On our opening drives we have guys open, we move the ball down the field with ease. Then the defense adjusts and we have nothing to offer for the rest of the game. Guys who were once open are now covered. Why can't/don't we change some things up to take advantage of the new looks the defense is giving us?

One thing I noticed from the game was our RB swinging out, he looked to be open most the time. Cutler should have dropped it to him more then he did. If he had taken advantage of that a bit more, who know what that would have opened up down field? If that was the plan, someone should have told Cutler to throw it in the flat and stop forcing throws down field. The Saints do that with Bush 10+ times a game when needed.

Thanks to everyone who has taken part in this conversation, I have to say, your faith in our offensive scheme has made me feel a bit better. It sucks we lost Hillis for the year. IMO next to Cutler, he was the guy we could least afford to lose... With the loss of him our slim chances of really being able to do something this year, dramatically decreased.

Originally Posted by fcspikeit

I'm talking about creativity in our passing game, The Colts had a one dimensional attack for years and they still managed to have open guys. They didn't win the SB until they got a running game. I'm not talking about being good enough to win the SB with a one dimensional passing attack.

There is a big difference between that and being able to put a pocket passing scheme together that actually works.

They also had Peyton Manning and Marvin Harrison. As good as our skill guys are on offense, we aren't on that level yet. Jay still has a couple years to go before he is on Peyton's level. As good as he has been we all have to remember this is only his second full season as a starter. There are going to be some inconsistencies with an offense this young....especially when he has no running game to fall back on.

I understand your point better now, and here's my thought: why change a winning formula? Even with mediocre talent at running back we can run this offense. I would rather have Jay continue to run the same plays and the staff stay within the existing philosophy and wait for fresh sets of legs in '09. It's possible that Shanny and Bates could go back to the drawing board and focus on drop-back and shotgun and do very well, but that would take at least one off-season. There might also be personnel issues with the line, since we have trained the guys in ZBS or whatever it's called. I do think this could be done, but plugging in fresh legs makes more sense to me. Especially since, as G pointed out, it's been proven to work.

But perhaps you know better than I the difficulties in making mid-season adjustments with the pass play calling. Is it easier to make a change than I suggest? I know they have been trying to compensate for the run with the wr screens and jailbreaks and quick hitches, but that's been sniffed out.

Cant argue with any of this, but I still have to question running up the middle on 3rd and 7 late in the half or throwing a 2 yard hitch on 3rd and 14 in their territory.

Cutler still misses an open guy from time to time, but I still cant begin to figure out why a kid with an arm as big as his is handcuffed so much by a passing game that never throws the ball 10 yards downfield.

Has Shanny lost his touch? I cant answer that. but it sure as hell looks like NFL defenses have figured him out.

Originally Posted by LRtagger

They also had Peyton Manning and Marvin Harrison. As good as our skill guys are on offense, we aren't on that level yet. Jay still has a couple years to go before he is on Peyton's level. As good as he has been we all have to remember this is only his second full season as a starter. There are going to be some inconsistencies with an offense this young....especially when he has no running game to fall back on.

So in your opinion, it's the players fault and not the scheme? I agree Manning is/was better then Cutler, IMO Marshall has the ability to have more of an impact on a game then Harrison. Royal is a closer comparison to Harrison then is Marshall. I hope that didn't come out wrong? Harrison is a stud. But he don't have the size to take advantage of the middle of the field like Marshall.

What is the name of the WR in Houston? Is it Johnson? Every game you see him making plays. They get it close and he does the rest. Most the balls coming his way have no business being thrown, yet he has shown time and time again, he will make the play. IMO Marshall has the size and skill set to be like that.

Getting back to your point, I would agree more and put the blame on Cutler if I was seeing him miss open guys.

One thing is for sure, either our scheming isn't taking advantage of the passing threats we have or the passing threats we have aren't as good as I think they are?

I just find it hard to believe there is no way of getting the guys we have open. When the colts were tearing us up, there was nothing we could do. No matter what, we could not cover everyone. We had LB's on Stockley and Clark. Any adjustments made just left Harrison and Wayne open or single covered. When was the last time we seen Marshall, Royal, Stockley or Sheffler wide open? The only time I have seen anyone wide open came off the bootleg, which leads me to believe, Our offensive passing attack lives and dies with the run game. Does it really have to be that way?

Originally Posted by fcspikeit

I understand our troubles with running the ball, I also know the affect it has on the passing game. That really goes to the heart of my question, do you believe Shanahan can put a successful passing scheme together, that don't revolve around our ability to run the ball?

Up until this point, all the success Shanahan schemes has had passing the ball has come of the run. Everything comes off the play action and bootleg. That is not a drop back pocket passing scheme. When the run goes, so does the play action and bootleg, If we can't play action and bootleg, we don't have success passing the ball.

For as long as I can remember, I have always heard that the running game sets up the passing game. As we all know, with all of the injuries, we do not have much of a running game right now. Therefore, the other team's defense has less to try to stop. In my opinion, the only thing the coaches can do now is get very creative with the passing game, and hope it works.