The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Orange Mane Discussion > Orange Mane Central Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-27-2012, 03:35 PM   #51
Chris
Millenium Scrooge McDuck
 
Chris's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,525

Adopt-a-Bronco:
OrlandoFranklin
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by montrose View Post
He was having drinks with Fox in Mobile the day after Allen took the Oakland gig. I'd say he's the likely favorite at this point - especially with Dean Peas taking the Ravens job and Smith looking like he's going to Oakland to be their DC.

My guess is the job is his if he wants it, which isn't a sure thing because he's going to be paid the same amount to sit at home this year if he wants and his kid is a top HS QB recruit. With that, he was in Mobile which is where coaches hunt for jobs so unless he was there to catch up with friends, he'd likely be interested.

The concern I'm sure is the long-term consistency as he already interviewed for KC's HCing job so he wants to move back into that role and you'd have to imagine he and McCoy will be getting interviewed again next year. With that, I've noticed most good HCs dont avoid hiring guys that might leave but rather encourage their development as it tends to make them better coaches. Also, if a HC gets a rep for being a guy who develops other HCs then some of the best assistants will want to be a part of that. So I wouldn't think the Broncos would avoid Del Rio out of fear he leaves to become a HC again. If he doesn't become the DC, it would be for other reasons (on either side) IMO.

There will be other candidates though, Mike Klis pointed out yesterday that Fox had no relationship with Allen prior to hiring him (and if you remember, Jim Mora Jr. was the original 1st choice - a former HC himself) but rather found out about him through a network of friends - in this instance, he called his buddy Sean Payton from their Giants days who gave him a good recommendation. So there is a larger pool since Fox has been around so long and has a lot of friends around the league. You add in Elway's contacts and realistically there's a crap load of guys they could look it, but my first guess would be Del Rio makes a lot of sense.
Excellent point.
Chris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2012, 03:44 PM   #52
TheReverend
Permanent Facepalm
 
TheReverend's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 37,678

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Mike Shanahan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beantown Bronco View Post
Ummm, last time I checked, he doesn't have his pick of gigs THIS year.

(And Gruden and Cowher have been out how long now, and they still are the go to names every year)
Due to his personality and success (and lack thereof as well), he doesn't have too many positive relationships that can put him at the forefront of work outside of through Fox. If he doesn't take adv of this opening its decent odds he'd have to start climbing the ranks as a LB coach again.

Also, something to take into account along with his son's football career, my gf does the insurance of the place he lives at and he rents.
TheReverend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2012, 04:39 PM   #53
Butterscotch Stallion
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Butterscotch Stallion View Post
just found Mccoy's playbook! so excited. I know this is off topic, but since this is a football discussion type thread I thought it would fit:





Attachment 30129


oubronco negged me for this....what a girl.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2012, 08:35 AM   #54
Chris
Millenium Scrooge McDuck
 
Chris's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,525

Adopt-a-Bronco:
OrlandoFranklin
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Butterscotch Stallion View Post
oubronco negged me for this....what a girl.
Some people just don't "get" art.
Chris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2012, 12:13 PM   #55
teknic
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhoIsJohnGalt View Post
don't forget the 10-yard cushions. those are really effective at letting a receiver get up to speed unmolested so they can make a move and juke out our young secondary players. i just l-o-v-e those 10-yard cushions. they remind me of the Slowick era... good times.
This. I also blame the huge cushions for the tendency of the Broncos defense to get shredded by screens.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2012, 12:38 PM   #56
Butterscotch Stallion
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris View Post
Some people just don't "get" art.
it's a hard life, let me tell you.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2012, 09:22 PM   #57
Agamemnon
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReverend View Post
Whoever you are,

Please institute this defense at the very least in package looks, but I would prefer it to be the base: create a 43 Double Fan which would obviously be played out of an under front (akin to below only with tighter splits than the 3T DT and 7 DE):



Background:

A double fan classically comes from 34 looks. Essentially it means the DL is going to adjust their splits so they're basically heads up on the opposing IOL (NT over C, DEs over Gs). What makes this a double fan is the pass rushing ability of BOTH 34 OLBs (see Pittsburgh's Harrison and Woodley -- also note the leaps and bounds of improvement of Washington's defense by adding Kerrigan opposite Orakpo and often playing double fans). Both OLBs will them line up over the tackles.
What does this create? One on one match ups across the board. Additionally, blitzing an ILB over the A gaps gives him a STRAIGHT shot at the QB with AT MOST a RB to try and stop him.


Von Miller gives us the freedom to apply this to our 43.

Imagine Elvis, Thomas, Bunkley, Ayers, Miller all one on one against the opposing OL. Getting wood yet? Good, let's go deeper.

Press coverage behind it. Lackluster for turnovers, for sure (at least until the effectiveness starts to embolden to jumping routes and putting 6 on the board with semi-regularity), but provides the rush and blitz another second to get to the QB and will be certain to cause both incompletions and sacks (*probably even more prominently intentional groundings) in spades. Press coverage (needed upgrades at RCB and nickel back), with a cover 1 safety (Moore dependent on development), and a box safety (Carter) to baby sit the TE to accommodate a potentially blitzing LB.

Enough p***Y footing around when we have significant pressure weapons.
Kill em all, let Tebow sort em out.
So you are basically advocating we run a 5-2 as our base defense? Seems like short timing patterns would eat that up to me. We might be able to generate more pressure with such a defense, but we'll be completely compromised in coverage against elite QB's with quick releases.

I like the package as a look that should be implemented in certain situations, but no way to the idea of it being our base defense.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2012, 09:25 PM   #58
ColoradoDarin
Not Too Shabby Poster
 
ColoradoDarin's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Wilson, NC
Posts: 8,219

Adopt-a-Bronco:
CJ
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agamemnon View Post
So you are basically advocating we run a 5-2 as our base defense? Seems like short timing patterns would eat that up to me. We might be able to generate more pressure with such a defense, but we'll be completely compromised in coverage against elite QB's with quick releases.

I like the package as a look that should be implemented in certain situations, but no way to the idea of it being our base defense.
Happening now.
ColoradoDarin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2012, 10:06 PM   #59
Mogulseeker
Formerly mightysmurf
 
Mogulseeker's Avatar
 
Eat greedy

Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Boulder... Vail when it snoooows
Posts: 16,917

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Lamin Barrow
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by scorpio View Post
Bunkley is going to get big money on the open market. I'm not optimistic about keeping him.
We need to resign Bunkley.
Mogulseeker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2012, 11:37 PM   #60
Agamemnon
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColoradoDarin View Post
Happening now.
Yep, and it wouldn't get better with an uber-aggressive 5-2 base defense. To run Rev's defense as the base defense we would need two awesome man-press corners and two awesome coverage safeties (which we categorically do not have at all right now), and even then I'm not sure it would be sound against the quick timing patterns of teams like the Patriots.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2012, 06:59 AM   #61
Beantown Bronco
Athletic Supporter
 
Beantown Bronco's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Mass
Posts: 20,560

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Matt Prater
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agamemnon View Post
, and even then I'm not sure it would be sound against the quick timing patterns of teams like the Patriots.
Well, to be fair, what defense HAS been working against their offense....short of one with at least 4 awesome DLinemen?
Beantown Bronco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2012, 10:44 AM   #62
TheReverend
Permanent Facepalm
 
TheReverend's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 37,678

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Mike Shanahan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agamemnon View Post
So you are basically advocating we run a 5-2 as our base defense? Seems like short timing patterns would eat that up to me. We might be able to generate more pressure with such a defense, but we'll be completely compromised in coverage against elite QB's with quick releases.

I like the package as a look that should be implemented in certain situations, but no way to the idea of it being our base defense.
The post you clicked "reply" to answers this
TheReverend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2012, 12:19 PM   #63
Shananahan
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

I like threads like this. The board needs more of them.

That said, nothing will work until we have the talent in the secondary levels to at least only get marginally abused in the quick passing game. As was said, our safeties need to make vast improvements and Goodman either needs to start huffing HGH daily or be replaced. Even with a guy like Mays and our mediocre DTs, solid safety play would have made the team look much better at key times this past season.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2012, 12:28 PM   #64
TheReverend
Permanent Facepalm
 
TheReverend's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 37,678

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Mike Shanahan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shananahan View Post
I like threads like this. The board needs more of them.

That said, nothing will work until we have the talent in the secondary levels to at least only get marginally abused in the quick passing game. As was said, our safeties need to make vast improvements and Goodman either needs to start huffing HGH daily or be replaced. Even with a guy like Mays and our mediocre DTs, solid safety play would have made the team look much better at key times this past season.
We NEED two new, YOUNG, talented corners.

...that being said, once we replace Goodman with a good football player, everything else will improve dramatically along with it
TheReverend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2012, 12:38 PM   #65
Mogulseeker
Formerly mightysmurf
 
Mogulseeker's Avatar
 
Eat greedy

Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Boulder... Vail when it snoooows
Posts: 16,917

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Lamin Barrow
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReverend View Post
We NEED two new, YOUNG, talented corners.

...that being said, once we replace Goodman with a good football player, everything else will improve dramatically along with it
We need them quick so they can learn under Bailey.

I think we should pick up Rashaen Mathis this offseason, then make a move for Tyrann Mathieu next year.

Honestly, I think the 1st could be an OG. Beadles is solid but not elite, and Tebow is most effective with an elite OL.

Wouldn't mind taking a DT in the 1st either to rotate with Warren, Bunkley, Vickerson, and Thomas. Is 5 DTs too many?
Mogulseeker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2012, 01:11 PM   #66
maher_tyler
Ring of Famer
 
maher_tyler's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: AZ
Posts: 6,707

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Von Miller
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by teknic View Post
This. I also blame the huge cushions for the tendency of the Broncos defense to get shredded by screens.
I like to think that our coaches were a bunch of pussies...if you're going to lose, at least go down swinging! The run, run, run offense and 3 rush D at times was pure chicken ****!!

Any chance we get Mathis?? That'd be a nice vet opposite Champ. Despite what others think, we have youth all over our secondary. Harris imppressed. Carter looked good for a rookie. Moore was banged up all year..he didn't impress me much but again, he was a rookie. I expect much bigger things from him next year after learning on the run. We still have Squid and Vaughn. I see us going for a vet CB via free agency. Draft a DT or MLB with the first couple of picks. I see us being a little more aggressive in FA this year. Hopefully Warren can come back healthy and back to form. Re-sign Bunkley. Sign Kampman and Mathis through FA. Pick up a change of pace RB while adding a receiving TE or another WR.

For the base D i'd like it to look something like this:

DE - Doom
DT - Warren
DT - Bunk
DE - Ayers/Kampman

WLB - DJ
MLB - Connor?? Rookie??
SLB - Miller

CB - Champ
FS - Carter
SS - Moore
CB - Mathis
maher_tyler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2012, 05:36 PM   #67
Agamemnon
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReverend View Post
The post you clicked "reply" to answers this
How so? Because you mention press coverage? Press coverage is fine and dandy, but we don't have the physical press corners to really pull it off as our base defense.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2012, 05:45 PM   #68
TheReverend
Permanent Facepalm
 
TheReverend's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 37,678

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Mike Shanahan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agamemnon View Post
How so? Because you mention press coverage?
Yes... press coverage is specifically designed to disrupt timing (your main gripe) and if it's weak against anything, it's longer developing 5+ step drops. Absolutely not short timing throws (stronger against zones and off man, specifically cover 3).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agamemnon View Post
Press coverage is fine and dandy, but we don't have the physical press corners to really pull it off as our base defense.
Justify this assumption?
TheReverend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2012, 06:01 PM   #69
Agamemnon
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReverend View Post
Yes... press coverage is specifically designed to disrupt timing (your main gripe) and if it's weak against anything, it's longer developing 5+ step drops. Absolutely not short timing throws (stronger against zones and off man, specifically cover 3).
I'm very well aware of that, but there are a lot of ways to get around that. Motioning receivers and and good use of the slot position allows teams to still use timing patterns against press coverage. Screen passes also seem like they would likely be very successful against such a defense with such aggressive pass rushing and a lot of man coverage.

Quote:
Justify this assumption?
What assumption? Bailey is a coverage corner, not a press guy (he's fine at it, but it's not exactly his strength), and Goodman is a joke in press coverage (he's a joke in general). Harris might be a good press corner, I don't know, but it seems to me that we would need to commit to drafting press corners exclusively if this was the way we wanted to go. We'd also need to seriously upgrade our safety coverage and MLB coverage, as all those guys would be put under a lot of pressure in the passing game in a defense that functionally amounts to a blitz on every down.

I'm not saying I don't like the package mind you. I really do actually. I just think it's too easy to exploit a defense like that if we are using it as our base set.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2012, 06:07 PM   #70
TheReverend
Permanent Facepalm
 
TheReverend's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 37,678

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Mike Shanahan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agamemnon View Post
I'm very well aware of that, but there are a lot of ways to get around that. Motioning receivers and and good use of the slot position allows teams to still use timing patterns against press coverage.
That's not true at all...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agamemnon View Post
Screen passes also seem like they would likely be very successful against such a defense with such aggressive pass rushing and a lot of man coverage.
Yes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agamemnon View Post
What assumption? Bailey is a coverage corner, not a press guy (he's fine at it, but it's not exactly his strength), and Goodman is a joke in press coverage (he's a joke in general). Harris might be a good press corner, I don't know, but it seems to me that we would need to commit to drafting press corners exclusively if this was the way we wanted to go. We'd also need to seriously upgrade our safety coverage and MLB coverage, as all those guys would be put under a lot of pressure in the passing game in a defense that functionally amounts to a blitz on every down.

I'm not saying I don't like the package mind you. I really do actually. I just think it's too easy to exploit a defense like that if we are using it as our base set.
Bailey was a predominantly a press corner for the first half of his career. Goodman IS a joke in general. Harris played a lot of press snaps this past year and Vaughn was a man-cover corner.

Also C1 would be asking our safeties to do what they did most of the season, so no point there either.
TheReverend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2012, 06:27 PM   #71
Agamemnon
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReverend View Post
That's not true at all...
Care to elaborate? As far as I'm aware, motioning receivers has long been used to counter press coverage as it allows you to get a receiver moving and off the line of scrimmage before the snap (particularly if you motion a receiver and snap the ball as he's moving). The slot position is likewise off the line of scrimmage and therefore harder to jam.

Quote:
Bailey was a predominantly a press corner for the first half of his career. Goodman IS a joke in general. Harris played a lot of press snaps this past year and Vaughn was a man-cover corner.

Also C1 would be asking our safeties to do what they did most of the season, so no point there either.
Bailey hasn't played that style in years, and isn't the athlete he was when he was younger. And our safeties failed utterly in their coverage duties this season, so that seems to be a pretty big issue actually.

You also didn't mention the MLB coverage. Don't you think we would need a MLB who had elite coverage skills to really make this work?

Again, what you are advocating is blitzing nearly every down with at least one extra guy, and that comes with serious problems. No matter what formation you use.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2012, 06:33 PM   #72
TheReverend
Permanent Facepalm
 
TheReverend's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 37,678

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Mike Shanahan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agamemnon View Post
Care to elaborate? As far as I'm aware, motioning receivers has long been used to counter press coverage as it allows you to get a receiver moving and off the line of scrimmage before the snap (particularly if you motion a receiver and snap the ball as he's moving). The slot position is likewise off the line of scrimmage and therefore harder to jam.
There's a specific number of players that HAVE to be on the LOS. Motioning a player does nothing to effect who and how many you can get that jam off of... a SE will still be an SE and a Flanker will still be a flanker...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agamemnon View Post
Bailey hasn't played that style in years, and isn't the athlete he was when he was younger. And our safeties failed utterly in their coverage duties this season, so that seems to be a pretty big issue actually.

You also didn't mention the MLB coverage. Don't you think we would need a MLB who had elite coverage skills to really make this work?

Again, what you are advocating is blitzing nearly every down with at least one extra guy, and that comes with serious problems. No matter what formation you use.
Clearly you dont understand this.

It's specifically DESIGNED to help coverage limitations by attacking the pocket...
TheReverend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2012, 07:47 PM   #73
Agamemnon
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReverend View Post
There's a specific number of players that HAVE to be on the LOS. Motioning a player does nothing to effect who and how many you can get that jam off of... a SE will still be an SE and a Flanker will still be a flanker...
I know this. But you can choose to line up your #1 receiver in the slot or put him in motion to counter the jam. That was my point.

Quote:
Clearly you dont understand this.

It's specifically DESIGNED to help coverage limitations by attacking the pocket...
I understand that it basically boils down to trying to get 1-on-1 blocking situations to generate pressure, and that that can help your coverage if you win those 1-on-1 matchups. But even with dominant pass rushers at those five positions (right now we have two), you aren't going to always win those match ups, or at least not immediately (and offenses are going to use TE's and RB's to help out, so you really aren't getting true 1-on-1's anyway). So you need solid coverage units or you are going to end up leading the league in big plays given up very quickly (especially playing press coverage all the time). Live by the blitz, die by the blitz. What you are advocating is definitely living by the blitz.

Maybe press coverage can completely, or almost completely, negate short timing routes. I'm not convinced, but I suppose if the scheme was implemented really well and we add another solid pass rusher or two, it's possible. Even then, you're still looking at being very vulnerable to big plays without some really good talent in the defensive backfield.
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:42 AM.


Denver Broncos