Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Travathan might be out but Marshall is balling-out

  1. Default Trevathan might be out but Marshall is balling-out



    By Colin Welsh

    After fracturing the top of his kneecap on the second defensive play during the Broncos win over the Jets on Sunday, Danny Trevathan has been placed on Injured Reserve with designation to return. As one of the most important players on the team, many feel like this is terrible news for the Denver Broncos.

    Trevathan has only played one game this year, and was one of the most impactful defenders on the field that day. He led the team with six tackles and had four stops. He was just decent in coverage, but his presence was definitely felt.

    Nate Irving, one of the guys who sees more action with Trevathan out, shines in the run game, but his coverage abilities are nothing compared to Trevathan's. Irving has allowed 13 receptions on 16 targets, 177 yards, a touchdown, as well as a quarterback rating of 133.6.

    However, over the past few weeks Brandon Marshall has stepped up big time. He is the guy that fills Travathan’s roll more often than not and he has been better than advertised. After a shaky first couple of weeks in coverage, where he allowed over 150 passing yards, a touchdown, and a quarterback rating of over 100, he has improved dramatically. The past two weeks he has only allowed just................

    CONTINUE READING HERE
    Last edited by BSN Denver; 10-16-2014 at 12:53 PM.
    Your multimedia hub for Denver sports including, TV, radio, web, and social platforms. It all comes together at BSNDenver.com

  2. #2

    Default

    Holy those are awful numbers for Irving; no wonder the coaches gave up on playing him in nickel and went back to a pair of Wills. It's not like we've faced lots of great 133.6 rated QBs either; Luck's legit, but the best after that were Alex Smith (who's not as bad as many think, but has WRs with "hands like the Venus de Milo") and Wilson. When he finally got the starting nod, I had hopes the 3rd round pick we drafted to be our defensive QB 4 years ago might be living up to his draft position at last, but must now wonder anew. Maybe he should revert to backup Sam and let Steven Johnson have the starting Mike slot.
    Oh, valid point. I thought you meant all starters, you should take the time to be more descriptive, don't be shy. Jaded

    Never confuse frustrated candor and disloyal malice.
    Love can't be coerced. —Me

  3. #3

    Default

    I wonder how much Trevathan and Marshall should credit Del Rio and the LB coach for putting them into position to make plays.

  4. The Following User High Fived Al Wilson 4 Mayor For This Post:


  5. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Al Wilson 4 Mayor View Post
    I wonder how much Trevathan and Marshall should credit Del Rio and the LB coach for putting them into position to make plays.
    My guess is a lot. If I could replace Fox with Del Rio, I'd do it tomorrow; it's not his fault the Jags think football's a competition to see who can spend the least cap money.

    Despite claims our 2011 defense was so good it carried us to a division title and Dennis Allen to a head coaching job, it's been FAR better under Del Rio. It ranked 2nd overall and 3rd vs. both run and pass in 2012, but Champs age, Moores inexperience and a host of offensive and STs gaffes ended our playoff run early. In 2013, it had key players missing virtually all season, but was good enough to stop Seattle most of the SB even with FIVE starters gone; sadly, our stout half-strength D didn't MATTER after the offense handed out a safety, pick-six and another Int, while the STs handed out a kickoff return TD.

    Our D IS "rock solid," at EVERY spot and all the way down to the waterboy. The only potential weak link is Irvings four-year struggle to fill the Mike spot for which we drafted him with the 3rd rounds #2 pick, but if Del Rio and his staff STILL haven't managed to get him over that hump, I doubt anything ever can. Nearing the end of the Manning Era, it seems clear defense will define the post-Manning Broncos.
    Oh, valid point. I thought you meant all starters, you should take the time to be more descriptive, don't be shy. Jaded

    Never confuse frustrated candor and disloyal malice.
    Love can't be coerced. —Me

  6. #5

    Default

    When he finally got the starting nod, I had hopes the 3rd round pick we drafted to be our defensive QB 4 years ago might be living up to his draft position at last, but must now wonder anew. Maybe he should revert to backup Sam and let Steven Johnson have the starting Mike slot.
    Tazy

  7. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tazy View Post
    When he finally got the starting nod, I had hopes the 3rd round pick we drafted to be our defensive QB 4 years ago might be living up to his draft position at last, but must now wonder anew. Maybe he should revert to backup Sam and let Steven Johnson have the starting Mike slot.
    Von Miller is the SAM.

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Little Elm, TX
    Adopted Bronco:
    #58
    Posts
    26,171

    Default

    Finding a Mike that is "great" in coverage isnt exactly the easiest thing to do. Most of the better MLB's to play the game were a liability in coverage. So, if we're going to judge them purely on their ability to excel at both phases...we're probably going to be disappointed for a very long time.

  9. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Al Wilson 4 Mayor View Post
    Von Miller is the SAM.
    Hence Irving would be BACKUP Sam, starting only if Miller's suspended/hurt (i.e. as he did on both such occasions last year) or needs a rest. It'll be interesting (and perhaps not pleasantly) to see if Marshall's up to facing Gates this Thursday now that our starting Will's on Return-Designated IR, because we can't spare many DBs to help him since we've got to cover Floyd, Royal and Allen. Maybe Ward can come up to help, but with Moore over the top, we'll need to the rest of our front seven to play like the top five ranked run D they are as much as SD runs.

    Sidebar: The post you responded to was MINE; how the was it reassigned to someone who (apparently) joined literally just yesterday?
    Last edited by Joel; 10-21-2014 at 02:06 AM.
    Oh, valid point. I thought you meant all starters, you should take the time to be more descriptive, don't be shy. Jaded

    Never confuse frustrated candor and disloyal malice.
    Love can't be coerced. —Me

  10. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CoachChaz View Post
    Finding a Mike that is "great" in coverage isnt exactly the easiest thing to do. Most of the better MLB's to play the game were a liability in coverage. So, if we're going to judge them purely on their ability to excel at both phases...we're probably going to be disappointed for a very long time.
    The 4-3 MLB was literally invented because Bill George could cover passes over the middle and still fill his old thumper role, which revolutionized the game by turning the 5-2 into the 4-3. In MAN coverage, most LBs are liabilities PERIOD; they're LBs, not DBs, even if it's increasingly easy to mistake some Wills for SSs (or even vice versa if they know Kam Chancellors pharmacist. ) In ZONE coverage, most of the great Mikes did pretty good, because if they WERE just thumpers, they'd be Sams and someone qualified would be playing Mike. Like these better MLBs to play the game:
    http://www.pro-football-reference.co...G/GeorBi00.htm
    http://www.pro-football-reference.co...H/HuffSa00.htm
    http://www.pro-football-reference.co...B/ButkDi00.htm
    http://www.pro-football-reference.co...L/LaniWi00.htm
    http://www.pro-football-reference.co...N/NitsRa00.htm
    http://www.pro-football-reference.co...L/LambJa00.htm

    In their prime, most of those guys had more Ints each healthy season than many starting DBs: They covered SOMETHING over the middle, in addition to stuffing the run and the occasional blitz (or in Butkus' case, the frequent blitz; he still managed to retire with 22 Ints, with 5 his rookie year alone.) Their ability to excel at 2/3 phases (if not all) is what makes Mikes more than Sams and Wills, and as critical to the 4-3 as OLBs are to the 3-4. Note: This isn't another plea to move our 3-4 OLB (or one of them, if we count Ware as another) to Mike, just a note to say: Most Mikes can play Sam, but few Sams can play Mike.
    Oh, valid point. I thought you meant all starters, you should take the time to be more descriptive, don't be shy. Jaded

    Never confuse frustrated candor and disloyal malice.
    Love can't be coerced. —Me

  11. #10

    Default

    It'll be interesting to see if/how well Marshall covers Gronk tomorrow. He's good, but I wouldn't leave him alone, especially since so few NE WRs demand extra attention and Denver has so many excellent CBs who can shut down any of them one-on-one. I hope we put Marshall on Gronk with Ward helping over the top and Irving in a shallow underneath zone, while Miller and the front four rush Brady. We'll see....
    Oh, valid point. I thought you meant all starters, you should take the time to be more descriptive, don't be shy. Jaded

    Never confuse frustrated candor and disloyal malice.
    Love can't be coerced. —Me

  12. The Following User High Fived Joel For This Post:


  13. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joel View Post
    It'll be interesting to see if/how well Marshall covers Gronk tomorrow. He's good, but I wouldn't leave him alone, especially since so few NE WRs demand extra attention and Denver has so many excellent CBs who can shut down any of them one-on-one. I hope we put Marshall on Gronk with Ward helping over the top and Irving in a shallow underneath zone, while Miller and the front four rush Brady. We'll see....
    Yeah, I'm curious to see Del Rio's game plan for Gronkowski. If he's got Marshall on him one on one that's a big mistake.

  14. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fulshear, TX
    Adopted Bronco:
    Bob Howsam
    Posts
    38,282

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Slick View Post
    Yeah, I'm curious to see Del Rio's game plan for Gronkowski. If he's got Marshall on him one on one that's a big mistake.
    I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Talib cover Gronk. He was man on against Graham last year and shut him down. If the coverage against Gronk is good, Brady will not have his check down guy and will look to throw the ball elsewhere. And no way Gronk beats Talib deep.
    "Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer" -Arnold

  15. The Following 2 Users High Fived SR For This Post:


  16. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SeeingRed View Post
    I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Talib cover Gronk. He was man on against Graham last year and shut him down. If the coverage against Gronk is good, Brady will not have his check down guy and will look to throw the ball elsewhere. And no way Gronk beats Talib deep.
    I really like that approach, maybe better than using Marshall and/or Ward. As you say, Gronk can't outrun him, and Talib's big and physical enough he won't automatically be overpowered either (though Gronk does have nearly ˝' and 60 lb.s on him, so definitely has the edge there.) Normally, I'd have reservations about taking one of our top two CBs away from primary WR coverage, but NEs WRs just aren't good enough (and Roby and Webster ARE good enough) to deeply concern me: We can put Talib on Gronk and still count on Harris, Roby and Webster to shutdown Edelman, Wright and Amendola most of the game.

    All that's especially true if we can get consistent prompt pressure with just the front four and Miller, because Marshall and Irving both remain available to play an underneath zone on each side with Moore and Ward either playing Cover 2 or one of them coming up in a robber position behind the LBs while the other guards the end zone. Both that and an Irving middle-zone with Marshall on Gronk short and handing him off to Ward deep are FAR more appealing than trying Quinton Carter and hoping he's more effective than against Gates. I can't get that deep post from Rivers out of my mind....
    Oh, valid point. I thought you meant all starters, you should take the time to be more descriptive, don't be shy. Jaded

    Never confuse frustrated candor and disloyal malice.
    Love can't be coerced. —Me

  17. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fulshear, TX
    Adopted Bronco:
    Bob Howsam
    Posts
    38,282

    Default

    I feel fine with Harris on Edelman, Roby on LaFell, and Webster in the slot if Talib were to cover Gronk...
    "Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer" -Arnold

  18. The Following User High Fived SR For This Post:


  19. #15

    Default

    I might put Roby in the slot since he asked to try it a few weeks ago and did well, but it's a minor point as long as Harris locks up Edelman: With 2 elite CBs and 2 good youngsters, one of each capable of playing the slot or outside, we have MANY nice options, Brady, precious few. The only real risk I see is him having his WRs run the youngsters into each other in man coverage, but that's just another reason to have the LBs in underneath zones. Gronk's still the only really scary guy Brady's got; Edelman's good, but not a game-changer, so I'm confident Harris can handle him and leave Talib for Gronk.
    Oh, valid point. I thought you meant all starters, you should take the time to be more descriptive, don't be shy. Jaded

    Never confuse frustrated candor and disloyal malice.
    Love can't be coerced. —Me

Go
Shop AFC Champions and Super Bowl gear at the official online Pro Shop of the Denver Broncos!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
status.broncosforums.com - BroncosForums status updates
Partner with the USA Today Sports Media Group