SB Nation - Andrew Pinnock

San Diego Chargers' Roster: 2009 vs. 2008

John (obviousman) — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 14:02:57 -0000

3 months ago: San Diego Chargers running back LaDainian Tomlinson (21) and quarterback Philip Rivers (17) watch from the sidelines during their NFL preseason football game against the Atlanta Falcons at the Georgia Dome in Atlanta Saturday Aug. 29, 2009. (AP Photo/Dave Martin)

Browse more photos »

With the San Diego Chargers' 53-man roster set, I want to compare where the team is today compared to where they were one year ago. How do the position groups match up to each other? On talent alone, has the team gotten better or worse?

QB (2009): Philip Rivers, Billy Volek, Charlie Whitehurst

QB (2008): Rivers, Volek, Whitehurst

Verdict: Equal. There's been no change, but Rivers enters 2009 with no questions about his health (as he did in 2008) and a year of learning how to carry an NFL team on his back. Volek looks more polished as he gets even more comfortable with Norv Turner's offense. Still, any improvements here have more to do with time and chemistry rather than any talent improvement.

See the comparisons and verdicts of the rest of the position groups after the jump.

HB (2009): LaDainian Tomlinson, Darren Sproles, Michael Bennett, Gartrell Johnson, Jacob Hester, Mike Tolbert

HB (2008): LT, Sproles, Hester, Tolbert, Andrew Pinnock

Verdict: Better in '09. The Chargers went into 2008 thinking that Hester could fit the role of power RB and backup to LT. He has shown himself to be a fine FB, but not an NFL-caliber running back. So, based on the fact that there is at least one decent backup to LT in 2009 (Bennett) and possibly another (Johnson), 2009 wins.

WR (2009): Chris Chambers, Vincent Jackson, Buster Davis, Malcom Floyd, Legedu Naanee, Kassim Osgood

WR (2008): Chambers, Jackson, Davis, Floyd, Naanee, Osgood

Verdict: Equal. Same players, same result. Jackson, Floyd and Naanee may be better than they were at the start of 2008, but there's really no way of predicting that. The expectations for Chambers and Davis have dropped in the last year.

TE (2009): Antonio Gates, Brandon Manumaleuna, Kris Wilson

TE (2008): Gates, Manumaleuna

Verdict: Better in '09. Kris Wilson offers great blocking and good hands out of the 3rd TE position. Having a player like that on the end of the line (possibly next to Manu), offers a great improvement for goal line packages. Expect a lot of "Off Tackle" runs to his side when the Chargers are inside the opponents' 5 yard line.

OT (2009): Jeromey Clary, Marcus McNeill, Brandyn Dombrowski

OT (2008): Clary, McNeill, L.J. Shelton, Corey Clark

Verdict: Better in 2008. Although I really like Dombrowski, I'd certainly prefer to have 2 legitimate backup Tackles and a veteran mixed in there (like Shelton) makes me more comfortable as well. Shelton did a decent job filling in for McNeill in 2008, and it's always nice to have a proven commodity sitting on the bench should anything happen.

G (2009): Kris Dielman, Louis Vasquez, Tyronne Green

G (2008): Dielman, Mike Goff, Scott Mruczkowski

Verdict: Better in '09. Dielman is healthier than he was going into 2008, Goff was a train-wreck last season and has since flopped in KC, and Mooch is still on the team. Louis Vasquez brings a massive presence to the right side of the line that should eventually help balance it out.

C (2009): Nick Hardwick, Mruczkowski

C (2008): Hardwick, Jeremy Newberry, Cory Withrow

Verdict: Better in '09. Hardwick is healthy, which is the biggest improvement here, and Mooch is a better blocker than Newberry and Withrow combined. The reason the Chargers were able to go with only 8 offensive linemen is because Mruczkowski and Green can both play Center and Guard. Dombrowski can also play either Tackle or Guard.

Defense

DT (2009): Jamal Williams, Ogemdi Nwagbuo

DT (2008): Williams, Brandon McKinney

Verdict: Equal. Both McKinney and Nwagbuo are young and have shown themselves to be capable in the preseason. Regular work in the season will let the team know if Nwagbuo is ready to fill that backup NT slot long-term.

DE (2009): Luis Castillo, Travis Johnson, Vaughn Martin, Jacques Cesaire

DE (2008): Castillo, Igor Olshansky, Cesaire, Ryon Bingham

Verdict: Incomplete. For as bland as Igor was as the Chargers' DE, he stayed healthy and was consistent enough to almost never get bowled over. Cesaire's health will help determine if this group has been improved over 2008, as well as how well Travis Johnson can transition back to the 3-4 and if he's improved work ethic. Since neither is a starter, I'll call Martin and Bingham a tie.

ILB (2009): Kevin Burnett, Stephen Cooper, Tim Dobbins, Brandon Siler

ILB (2008): Dobbins, Siler, Matt Wilhelm, Derek Smith, Anthony Waters

Verdict: 2009, better by a long shot. Cooper wasn't on the initial 53 man roster from 2008 because he was serving a 4 game suspension, so that's a big improvement. Burnett has shown himself to be a major playmaker in the Chargers defense, which puts him leaps and bounds ahead of Wilhelm, Smith and Waters.

OLB (2009): Shawne Merriman, Shaun Phillips, Larry English, Jyles Tucker, Antwan Applewhite

OLB (2008): Merriman, Phillips, Marques Harris, Jyles Tucker

Verdict: 2009 wins. A healthy Merriman (remember, the Chargers knew he was planning on playing 2008 on a bad knee), plus a first-round draft pick, makes this an easy choice.

CB (2009): Quentin Jammer, Antonio Cromartie, Antoine Cason

CB (2008): Jammer, Cromartie, Cason, Cletis Gordon, DeJuan Tribble

Verdict: Tie. Gordon and Tribble don't bring anything to the 2008 group. Figuring that out helped the Chargers to take the risk and go with only 3 CBs in 2009.

FS (2009): Eric Weddle, Paul Oliver, C.J. Spillman

FS (2008): Weddle, Oliver

Verdict: 2009, but just barely. I don't know that Spillman will see a lot of time as a FS in '09, but he should be a force on special teams and could eventually develop into the backup FS or a starting SS.

SS (2009): Clinton Hart, Steve Gregory, Kevin Ellison

SS (2008): Hart, Gregory

Verdict: 2009, but just barely. Ellison brings something to the table in goal line situations (where he can't get burned deep), and I hope he can do something for special teams, but that's about it right now. If he continues to develop, keeping him this season will pay dividends in the future.

Special Teams (LS/K/P): David Binn, Nate Kaeding and Mike Scifres are rocks in this group. The Chargers, and their fans, are hopeful that this trio stays together for another five seasons.

Do you have a question for next week's mailbag? Don't hesitate to e-mail me directly with your question and I'll make sure to answer it before next week's game.

Team Building and the Denver Broncos

Emmett Smith — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 17:30:10 -0000

More photos » by Ed Andrieski - AP

The selection of Alphonso Smith is among several choices which have polarized Broncos fans everywhere.

Browse more photos »

The weekend of the draft is past, the main part of free agency as well as undrafted free agency is behind us and now we have to long opportunity to consider, in some detail just what it is that the Broncos brain trust has done in terms of making over this team. The Broncos are a team whose record was 8-8. This was a team who made history by being three games up with three to go and dropping them all, including the tiebreaker. It was historically bad on defense and special teams, but not as much better on offense as some have held. Passing yards are a poor measure of a team - red-zone percentage, points scored and similar measures mean far more. Weaknesses abounded, as statistics and analysis made clear. It was a team whose record was mediocre, but whose framework was as flimsy as cheap wicker

The free-agent period, draft and undrafted-free-agent signings have been a study in team-building. Whether you do or don't support the way it is being done, it's important to step back for a moment, lower your shields and be willing to take a long look at what has been done before judging one way or the other. Hoosierteacher's analysis of the draft strategy and how it plays out was a masterpiece. I don't care if you agree with him or not and it shouldn't matter - his careful attention to detail, knowledge of the game and application of rational discourse to the subject was a textbook example of how to break down a process. I used to write textbooks - I'm not speaking in hyperbole. It was brilliant.

Then I looked at the new Broncos roster, the one that we will mostly (there will be additions, I suspect) bring into training camp, including the people that we brought in, the ones changing assignments/positions, the ones that we drafted and the undrafted-free-agent signings. You can certainly argue the individual picks. Many people have strongly-held opinions about the draft. They feel that we should have done X, taken Y or not done Z. It's understandable - the draft style, strategy and individual choices are matters for intense scrutiny, personal feelings and sports-information judgments.

I don't have those strong opinions, really. Am I a ‘homer' or ‘drinking the kool-aid'? Some will certainly think so, but if so, they don't know me. I'm a SunnySider by nature, but I'm generally analytical in my thinking. I went into last season thinking that we'd be 7-9 if things didn't fall our way and 9-7 if we did very well. I was close. I'm frequently not close, but the point is that I don't tend to be (with great affection to Mike Clark) in La La Land. I'd love 13-3, but I'm not expecting it this year.

We have, on the current face of it, a very hard schedule. A dispassionate viewpoint would say that we have a new coach, QB, offensive coordinator and scheme, defensive coordinator and scheme, and a large quantity of new players. Those things are hard to overcome in the short term, and for that reason I hope for a good year, but don't expect it. If we achieve an 8-8 year, I'll be content.

One of the things that I think that I know is that the scouts are pros, the GM looks at thousands of hours of film that I don't have and talks to lots of folks who have forgotten more than I ever learned on the subject. I think that in light of free-agent acquisitions, undrafted-free-agent signings and the draft picks that we effectively improved the defense, offense and special teams.

It might help to know that I began this project simply to find out a central question -

Did we make a concerted attempt to address each position and try to make the changes needed to mold this squad into a contender?

My thinking was this - if we addressed each position, one can still (and should) argue their thoughts or ‘feelings' about this player or that. However, there has been a large debate as to whether we even made a bold attempt to change the team. To find out, I started by listing all of the changes in personnel that we made. I used the term ‘Brought in' to describe a FA signing, traded for is obvious, and signed was used to delineate undrafted-free-agent acquisitions.

I started with the front office. Unsurprisingly, Pat Bowlen remains the owner. After that, however, this is what the Broncos have changed:

Josh McDaniels - Head Coach
Mark Thewes - Assistant to Head Coach
Matt Russell - Director of College Scouting

Offense

Mike McCoy - Offensive Coordinator/Quarterbacks Coach
Clancy Barone - Tight Ends
Adam Gase - Wide Receivers
Quarterback - Brought in Chris Simms, traded for Kyle Orton and drafted Tom Brandstater
Running Back - brought in Correll Buckhalter, J.J. Arrington and LaMont Jordan, signed Kestahn Moore, drafted Knowshon Moreno
Fullback - Please note that we signed UDFA Marquez Branson, who is a perfect prototypical h-back and can play fullback, h-back or TE. For convenience, I listed him at TE but he might end up here.
Tight End - Drafted Richard Quinn, signed UDFA Marquez Branson
Wide Receiver - Drafted Kenny McKinley, brought in Jabar Gaffney, signed UDFAs Travis Shelton, Swift, David Grimes and Taylor
Offensive Line - Started with the best in the NFL, brought in Matt McChesney and Brandon Gorin, drafted Seth Olsen and Blake Schlueter, signed UDFAs Stanley Bryant, Marcus Gordon

Defense

Mike Nolan - Defensive Coordinator
Wayne Nunnely - Defensive Line
Ed Donatell - Secondary
Don Martindale - Linebackers
Defensive End - Brought in Darrell Reid, drafted Richard Ayers, signed UDFAs Rulon Davis, Everette Pedescleaux, resigned Kenny Peterson
Nose Tackle - Brought in J'Vonne Parker, Ronnie Fields, signed UDFA Chris Baker
Linebacker - Brought in Andra Davis and linebacker Nick Greisen, moved players Elvis Dumervil, Jarvis Moss and Tim Crowder, at least in theory or part/most of the time. Signed UDFAs Lee Robinson, Braxton Kelley and Jeff Schweiger
Cornerback - Brought in Andre' Goodman, drafted Alphonso Smith, signed UDFAs Tony Carter and D.J. Johnson
Strong Safety - Brought in Brian Dawkins, drafted David Bruton
Free Safety - Brought in Renaldo Hill, drafted Darcel McBath

Special Teams

Mike Priefer - Special Team Coordinator
Keith Burns- Coaching Assistant/Special Teams
Long Snapper - Brought in our most-argued Bronco, Lonie Paxton
Punter - Signed UDFA Britton Colquitt

There you have it. With the single exception of kicker (look for one between now and training camp), the Xanders/McDaniels team addressed every position on the team, in addition to bringing in new coaches to teach a new set of systems and a new Director of College Scouting. The option of debate of the individual players and the merits of various systems can and should continue. But one fact is now established - not a single position was simply left to chance. All of them were given new players and increased competition for the squad. In one SunnySider's opinion, that's a very good start.

As an example of the changes we are going through, let's accept that we changed QBs. One of the things that folks have bemoaned is the loss of a big arm and the arrival of a coach and two QBs (I'm interested to see how well they train Brandstater, and for how long) who don't throw the long bomb as well. Just as a final thought:

I want to win a lot of games over the next few years. One weakness that we had last year was that we didn't throw well in the red zone. Our QB only threw for 46.4%, 3.25 YPA, a nasty 4.76% interception rate, a touchdown rate of 20.24% and a very weak 74.1 QB rating in that area of the field.

For argument's sake, let's also note that Orton was sacked more than twice as often (4.8 to 2.3%), yet his completion percentage was 52.5% for 4.22 ypa with a much better 1.69% interception rate, a touchdown rate north of 22% while dealing with a sack rate of 4.84% (I watched the film - it wasn't his feet, but his O-Line) and a QB rating of 96.0 in the red zone.

Given all of the facts, I'd have to conclude that Orton is generally a far better QB in the red zone. The ability to throw the ball far isn't an asset in the red zone - you need to be able to make throws accurately for a higher completion percentage while avoiding interceptions. That's what wins games. And it's my belief in looking at our roster that we've taken a lot of steps to make sure that we do.

Will Kyle Orton be our QB? I don't know. I do know that he achieved the above with a very limited scheme, a porous line and very weak receivers, which makes him a far better acquisition than many have suggested. I also know that our team now has better coaches (who among us misses Slowik?), receivers, running game and offensive line than we did last year, based entirely on performance. I don't know what our record will ultimately be this year, but I'm clear on this - we made a lot of long-needed changes. In my opinion, the future is brighter for doing so. Hoosierteacher said this in one of his comments:

"I imagine the schedule will be too tough to overcome. The wins just may not be there. But I also believe we'll have better players playing better football. By the following year, I bet it pays off."

I know that he's right. The record over the next three years will be the real test of this approach. But if you hear someone say, as many have, that the Broncos didn't address certain positions in this offseason - you can send them this link. They didn't just address certain positions. They addressed them all.

Poll

How do you feel the Denver Broncos did at addressing all of the positions in the NFL Draft and offseason?

Great - 13-3, Baby!

302 votes

Not bad. The players could have been better

389 votes

I'm not convinced about the coaches or the players

226 votes

We're toast

124 votes

1041 votes | Poll has closed

Around the NFL 4/30

John (obviousman) — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 14:09:46 -0000

More photos » by Ed Andrieski - AP

Denver Broncos head coach Josh McDaniels talks about the NFL draft during a news conference at the team's headquarters in Englewood, Colo., on, Friday, April 24, 2009. (AP Photo/Ed Andrieski)

Browse more photos »

The Saints released 35-year-old Defensive Tackle Hollis Thomas. With concerns over the Chargers depth on the defensive line, and some cap room to spare, we may want to keep our eyes on some of these veterans that may have a good year or two left.
Freddy Keiaho, an unrestricted free-agent, has signed with the Colts for another two years. Even after two productive years as the Colts starting ROLB Keiaho, a San Diego State alum, still manages to fly under the radar of other NFL teams.
The Patriots released Bo Ruud, their 6th round draft pick in the 2008 NFL Draft and the brother of Tampa Bay LB Barrett Ruud, after a disappointing year spent on injured-reserve.
The Denver Broncos have signed veteran linebacker Nick Greisen and released fullback Andrew Pinnock. Although the Broncos are moving to the 3-4 defense in 2009, they did not draft any linebackers. Since the draft they've signed two undrafted free agents and now have signed Greisen, who is a bit of a journeyman backup. I think they're going to have some trouble rushing the passer this year. On a similar note, the Broncos have on their roster SIX running backs that have at least one career start and a first-round pick who is expected to start in front of all of them. I'm thinking at least a couple of those guys are going to get cut. Right now their HB depth chart probably looks something like this:

Knowshon Moreno (rookie)
Correll Buckhalter (16 games started)
Selvin Young (13 games started)
J.J. Arrington (8 games started)
Ryan Torain (1 game started)
LaMont Jordon (29 games started)
Peyton Hillis (6 games started)
Kestahn Moore (rookie)

Thursday News and Notes

Gamecock Man — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 12:54:29 -0000

Football

SI's Latest Preseason Poll. Although they only have five in the top 25, all five SEC teams are in the top 15, although. Carolina is nowhere to be seen.

A couple of things jump out at me about this poll. One, I was as impressed as anyone by what Ole Miss did late last season, but I'll believe they're good enough to be seventh in the country when I see it. Their offense should be pretty amazing and the defense serviceable, but this is Count Giggidy (or whatever EDSBS calls him). He's bound to blow a couple of winnable games along the way, one of them hopefully in Columbia on a Thursday night.

Two, apparently SI thinks NC State deserves "just missed the cut" status while we don't. I think we're going to dispel that notion fairly quickly when the season gets underway. From what I heard about their spring game, the 'Pack are in desperate need of a serviceable offense.

What's everyone else think about this poll?

Spurrier on the E Cook and Captain Munnerlyn Situation. Good story from Dr. Saturday here. As he reports, Spurrier pretty bluntly says that Cook and Munnerlyn jumped too early because they thought they might have a shot at going higher than was reasonable. Spurrier also comments fairly plausibly on the Jamon Meredith situation. Meredith blamed the Carolina staff for his fall to the fifth round, but Spurrier, quite believably, says that he and his staff wouldn't say anything bad about players and that Meredith should shoulder more responsibility for what happened to him. Fair enough, I say.

Other News

Andrew Pinnock Waived by Broncos. His knees may be just about shot, but good luck finding a new gig to Andrew.

Divining the McDaniels Way, Part 3 - The Passing Game

Emmett Smith — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 17:30:08 -0000

This series is the outcome of a month-long collaboration between nycbroncosfan and broncobear. In general, NYC covered the stats and Doc handled most of the writing and analysis. We hope that it sheds light on some of the questions that have arisen as to just what, exactly, Josh McDaniels has been doing with the New England offense over the past four years. It also looks at Jay Cutler's time as the primary starter in Denver over the past two years to establish where the two Patriots and Broncos do and do not match up. We thoroughly enjoyed working on this project and hope that you will take just as much pleasure in reading it. Hopefully it will answer some of your questions about what to expect of the 2009 Broncos, and we look forward to your comments and critiques. Many thanks to our esteemed colleagues styg50 and hoosierteacher for their input, and to Zappa for his invaluable aid in managing the code and the templates.

Part 1 featured an overview of the Patriots' and Broncos' offenses, while Part 2 focused on the running game. Today, we look at the Passing Game. Of course, much has changed around here lately; as with the previous sections, Part 3 compares the Jay Cutler-led Broncos with the Josh McDaniels-led Patriots. Naturally, the importation of Kyle Orton may have some effect on what the Broncos' passing game is able to accomplish as compared with a Cutler-led offense. However, many issues continue to be relevant - the Broncos still have many of the same weapons and the O-Line remains intact. The purpose is still to see what has been for us as fans, to understand what McDaniels has been doing and to look to the future for whatever clues may be found. In the future, look for additional articles dealing with Chris Simms' background and tendencies as well as Kyle Orton's and some comparative issues between them.

A Short Analysis of NE Offense

There are certain overall patterns that emerged that we expect to see, in degree, from Josh McDaniels when the Broncos take the field in 2009. We've mentioned before that we consider the New England offensive approach to include "a willingness to use the running backs in committee to maximize production from the team, good tight ends that have a specific role in the scheme, and an attack based in three or more receivers, liberal use of the shotgun and passing first, including but not limited to the use of short running-back passes." Those beliefs were borne out by this experience.

We have also previously noted that New England tends to win because they emphasize preparation, knowledge, excellent execution of specific roles and intellect as well as physical ability. They tend to play smarter, but do not sacrifice the ability to play very physical football at the same time. This combination of scheme, flexibility, role-specific skill and execution as well as the importance of the team over the individual proved itself to effectively maximize the contribution of its players within their football system.

Because of that, it's impossible to get too specific about New England's tendencies without noting that they change greatly from game to game. It's one constant - the application of the unexpected - and I'd have to consider that a strength of their approach.

Continued inside...

Formations and Impressions

Wikipedia suggests that the Patriots run a variation of the classic Erhardt-Perkins offense. They installed it under Charlie Weis, changed it to suit personnel, gained input from Bill Belichick and also from Urban Meyer and adapted it still further under Josh McDaniels. While their offensive stratagem began as an Erhardt-Perkins approach, it is now several generations removed.

Secondly, and this is essential: As Doc has noted before, in one sense there is no single Patriots offense. Their designation of the Amoeba is a just description. Like all NFL teams, they vary formations and plays at need. New England just seems to do so at a very high level with great intention. That's one of the main facets of the Amoeba Offense. The games Doc saw gave him several specific examples.

Doc: For the game against Indy with the Patriots on the road, the general analysis was not surprising. New England used multiple formations and constantly varied them. While Mike Shanahan would run 10 different plays out of 1 formation. In their game, New England is at times the polar opposite - they never seemed to run the same formation twice in this game and instead frequently ran the same play out of many different formations.

They liked the shotgun in all games, using it anywhere between 45% and 68% of the time: that ratio varied as well. They generally aren't in the same formation on any two plays, and they may not run the same play in a single quarter or half. They use a fullback on about 1 play in 4 or 5, or as little as 1 in 10, depending on down and distance. The running back was most commonly in the I formation or standing next to the quarterback if he was in the shotgun. And, as we will discuss, how much they used certain formations varied greatly by which half it was and tb he score of the game.

New England used the 'spread formation' in which they spread the field both horizontally and vertically, most commonly against St. Louis and NY (Jets) Their variants on the spread (I am using this term somewhat loosely, although the Pats' tendency to use this formation both vertically and laterally was obvious) included using a tight end and/or a back as receivers and varying between 3 and 5 receivers on any given play. Anyone could be kept as a blocker - wide receiver, tight end or back. I did not count it as a spread formation with less than three wideouts unless the play specifically spread the field both horizontally and laterally. And, any and all receivers (WR, TE and/or RB/FB) could be on a particular route, with lots of routes out of the same formation(s). Again, in the Indy game, they rarely used a single formation with multiple variants, running a dizzying number of formations that stretched the Colts defense to the breaking point. In other games, running different plays out of the same formation was common, although in constantly varying degrees.

The complexity of New England's attack really stood out. Indianapolis, as a different example, uses a lot of routes that snarl the corners and safeties on one receiver while the other gets open: they employ lots of misdirection routes, and they do them better than anyone I've watched. The Pats, on the other hand, used a wide range of one- and two-tight end sets to counter, with from one to four other receivers, intermingling dominant shotgun formations with the quarterback taking snaps under center and different running-back sets. The tight ends were constantly on the move to create different looks, often with one tight end in motion. Even having a TE dropping back into a running back's stance was frequent.

While they like the 'spread' formations, against Indy they used them less than I expected. They do have a wide array of spread-type formations that they do employ, though, and I saw them most heavily against the Rams, particularly in the first half. When they do use a spread formation, even with an empty backfield, they are as likely to run a draw or an off-tackle run from a handoff as they are to pass. In some plays I watched, the RB can drop back from his 'receivers' position just behind the O line at the snap or Cassel might run, etc.

They also tried several wide-receiver screens and a couple of tight-end screens mixed in, off of spread formations. It's clear that as frequently as they use it, it's just a tool to them, rather than a dominating preference. It was clear that they wield the tools - the tools don't wield them, which is an important difference. However, since the weakness of their use of the spread - ignoring zone in favor of man coverage and blitzing far more often - has been exposed, I would expect McDaniels and New England separately to begin to change that tendency over 2009. They will probably change tools, in degree.

I saw a play using Welker that interested me against Miami. He started at the LOWR position, in a 2-up, 2-back receiver formation that New England likes to use. Just after the snap, Welker took off at a dead run to his right across the field, moving just above the line of scrimmage. By the time Welker reached the far side, Cassel was out of the pocket, rolling right; and while no one else was free, Welker had time for coffee. Easy throw and catch, 12 yards. Eddie Royal would be very tough to stop with that route, perhaps even impossible.

By the way, that's a common formation for New England. In it, they employ five down O-Linemen. There are two receivers - one a tight end (it varies as to which one), upright in a receiver stance behind the front 5 and on the outer edges of the O-Line. The second of those receivers might be a back, a tight end or a wideout. Two wide receivers are out wide. From this beginning, they run a wide array of routes and options, including bootleg, play action, the above-mentioned route and a nearly-endless set of other options. Miami uses the same formation, with the left inside receiver being a running back, to run one version of their Wildcat, a formation that had some initial success but seemed to sputter as the season went on.

The thing that struck me about the Patriots' style is that they are constantly probing, pushing, and looking for a weakness. You can watch it unfold, attacking one point after another, quickly, but in sequence. It's not as smash-mouth an approach as the original Erhardt-Perkins or, say, Miami or Pittsburgh would use. It's perhaps more like fencing than boxing.

Playing the Colts is probably a bit like being in a knife fight - they are constantly cutting at you until you are exhausted. New England seems slightly different - you can watch them constantly looking for the best adjustments. This probing side of the amoeba tendency alone will win its own certain share of close games. Making adjustments is a huge skill, the Broncos has often lacked in over the past years and Josh McDaniels does it very well.

The Patriots obviously like being unpredictable. Most teams do, of course, but in the film I watched, New England took it to the extreme. While there are statistical norms, in any single game there are no specific passing or rushing downs for the Pats. They will pass on short yardage, run (often a draw) on 3rd and long, 2nd and short or any other situation. Overall, it's hard to stop, and I suspect that it's nearly impossible to predict. Obviously, the matchups are a constant series of smaller battles, and those remain individual, but the overall tenor was partly based in avoiding normal responses to the given situations in order to confuse the opposing defense. As NYC's statistics showed, it works far more often that it fails.

Passing and the O-Lines

Performance of Pats and Broncos O-Lineman in 2008 and 2009 Season Age
	NE Starters	'09 Age	Starts	Sacks	Pen	Sks+Pen	DEN Starters	'09 Age	Starts	Sacks	Pen	Sks+Pen
LT	Light	31	16	7.5	1	8.5	Clady	23	16	0.5	3	3.5
LG	Mankins	27	16	5	2	7	Hamilton	32	16	2.5	6	8.5
C	Koppen	30	16	4.5	2	6.5	Wiegmann	36	16	1	3	4
RG	Neal(Yates)	33(29)	9(7)	2(6.25)	2(1)	4(7.25)	Kuper	27	16	0	4	4
RT	Kaczur(LeVoir)	30(27)	14(2)	4(2)	3(0)	7(2)	Harris	24	16	2.5	2	4.5
Tot/Avg		30.2	80	31.25	11	42.25		28.4	80	6.5	18	24.5

New England's O-Line was clearly at its weakest when being asked to pass-block. Cassel's sack percentage was 26th in the league, but the Patriots O-Line's pass protection was not merely sub-par. Its players are aging and the line's effectiveness is beginning to break down, although these may be separate issues. Matt Light and Nick Kaczur have been criticized by some writers as having lost a step, and their production as a line is certainly down. Four of their starters will be over age 30 during the upcoming season: Light (31), Dan Koppen (30), Stephen Neal (33) and Kaczur (30). Is it age?

That's one possible explanation, but they aren't doddering geriatrics, either. I wondered at whether the explanation was accurate, and after listening to hoosierteacher and styg50 I don't see it as that simple. The issues of decreased physical flexibility are probably legitimate, the injuries hampered them and the changes of personnel meant that players weren't used to each other. In both zone blocking and in gap blocking, the timing is key. In pass protection, you have to be able to trust the guy next to you, and that didn't always work out for the Pats. There were issues that came down to simply missing assignments

The injury bug hit the right side of the line, and Billy Yates was guilty of 6.25 sacks in 7 games before Steve Neal returned. Once Neal took over, he was a little better, being responsible for 2 sacks in 9 games. Backup RT Mark LeVoir was guilty of 2 sacks in two starts. 31-year old left tackle Matt Light was dunned with 7.5 over the season. Regardless of your opinion on the source of the problems, they will be looking for help in the draft or FA.

As noted, the Broncos were on the other extreme. Their linemen were charged with only 7.5 sacks over the course of the season, with rookie Kory Lichtensteiger being thrust in at RG for a few plays and giving up one. Rookie left tackle Ryan Clady was charged with but one half-sack and had only 3 penalties. RG Chris Kuper didn't give up a single sack in 16 games, but isn't even mentioned in Pro Bowl or All-Pro discussions. Casey Wiegmann gave up a single sack and made KC wonder why on earth they let him go (so do we). Ben Hamilton was the 'weak link', but while 6 penalties is too high, he give up only 2.5 sacks in 16 starts and seemed completely healed from his concussion.

What we can hope for...

TD and INT Rates
	TD%	INT%
DEN '07-'08	4.05%	2.91%
NE '05-'08	5.61%	2.13%

Better TD and INT rates - Perhaps these numbers have more to do with the player's decision-making ability than with coaching or scheme - but we can hope, right? Even if it's a decision-making issue, part of that is obviously coaching. The reality is that Cutler was prone to certain mistakes - not looking off the primary target and forcing throws were among them. At times the problems was with the receiver, but not often. Percentages like these tend to look small, but let's put them into perspective: Over a 500-pass attempt season (a modest number), those rates translate into a 20 TD/14.5 INT season versus a 28 TD/10.7 INT season. These are not small differences.

McDaniels did a remarkable job with Cassel, who hadn't previously started a game since high school. He molded the game to Cassel, increasing the complexity quickly over the season, and taught Cassel to take advantage of the game. The raw material that he will have to work with in Orton and Simms will at least be acceptable (in our opinion) and it could be tremendous, as we'll talk about in those later articles. As many among us have noted, Orton has a lot more potential than we would have believed prior to expanded analysis (and we have more on that to come), Chris Simms was a very good quarterback prior to his injury and there is no reason to believe that he won't be a very good one now. With either Orton or Simms, we look for the numbers to improve in overall touchdowns and to decrease in interceptions based upon what McDaniels accomplished in New England.

And, what we can expect in protection

Sacks and Yards Lost
	Sacks	Yds Lost	Sack%
DEN '07	32	175	5.85%
DEN '08	12	74	1.90%
DEN Avg	22	124.5	3.73%
NE '05	28	202	4.73%
NE '06	29	190	5.22%
NE '07	21	128	3.46%
NE '08	48	221	8.25%
NE Avg	31.5	185.3	5.39%

The same pass protection - at least we can hope for it. As noted, here's a category where the Broncos were far superior to the Patriots in 2008. As everyone here at MHR knows, Ryan Clady's arrival at left tackle and the ascension of Ryan Harris to the starting lineup at right tackle had quite a bit to do with that. Clady was charged with merely 0.5 sacks, while 2.5 sacks were attributed to Harris. Denver has the bookends for a happy and effective O-Line for many years to come. Of course, Casey Wiegmann's contribution cannot be overlooked - Wiegmann was only charged with 1.0 sack and made the Pro Bowl for the first time in his 13-year career, although as an alternate.

Cutler does have very good mobility, and the Broncos' love of the bootleg was a very effective tool over much of the season. Neither Orton nor Simms is quite as athletic, but with the increased levels of protection, either should be able to take advantage and get the throws off in time. The scheme and coaching of McDaniels' approach should be of benefit.

New England will have to do better than they did last season, but Josh won't be there to worry about it. Brady's faster release was part of the improvement in 2007 (as was a lightened injury bug), but Cassel didn't take sacks exclusively because of his pocket presence and throw mechanics. He was chased, hurried and harassed due to poor O line play. He became quick to pull it down and run or to throw the ball through enlightened self-interest - it kept him off the turf. The lines starters just weren't good in pass protection and their backups didn't play well. A lack of depth is a tough thing to overcome, as the Broncos are no doubt considering as the draft beckons.

Pass-Depth and -Direction Propensity - Broncos '07-'08 and Patriots '06-'08
	Short	Deep	Short Left	Short Middle	Short Right	Deep Left	Deep Middle	Deep Right
DEN '07-'08	81.0%	19.0%	31.2%	16.8%	33.0%	6.2%	5.4%	7.4%
NE '06-'08*	82.9%	17.1%	31.8%	20.7%	30.4%	6.7%	4.0%	6.4%

*Unfortunately these statistics are unavailable prior to the 2006 season, so in this instance we can only look at New England through a three-year window.

More short passes - These numbers don't exactly jump off the screen, as the differentials between the Broncos' and Patriots' tendencies are not as large as other examples. Not surprisingly, it looks like we can expect a very slightly-heavier reliance upon short passes, especially over the middle of the field. Cutler's accuracy will be a boon here. Over a 500-pass attempt season, the additional 3.9% of short-middle passes only translates to 20 balls going that way, but it's still a difference. The overall scheme is unlikely to change. In '07-'08, Cutler/Bates liked the deep passes on the right and middle substantially more often than did NE over the same period. That's likely to change.

This is another area where the incoming scheme and the current QB options seem ready-made for each other. Both Simms and Orton seem capable, based on past performance, of taking advantage of a NE-style scheme and staying, for the most part, with shorter, more accurate passes. Cutler's incredible velocity could even be a downside at times, leaving his receivers with bent and injured fingers and hands. A lighter ball, accurately thrown, can lead to better numbers in the short passing game.

The New England tendency has been to stretch the field both vertically and horizontally. Both Simms and Orton are capable of making some of the deep throws. Regarding Orton, TedB, in this week's Shallow Thoughts and Nearsighted Observations noted,

In this highlight package, you can see Orton hit on slants, deep outs, fades and crossing patterns, but what I was really impressed with was his touch on deep throws. This used to be his weakness, but he's vastly improved his skills in this area. He shows a lot of skill in dropping the ball over the top of the CB, and outside of the S against Cover-2 looks. That's something which neither of our last 2 QBs had much skill at. One of the keys to the McDaniels offense is challenging the deep outside, and I am confident that Orton has the skill set to do it.

That's good news. As we'll talk about in the future, Simms also has some skill in that area.

Pass Distribution

Pass Production by Position - Broncos '07-'08 and Patriots '05-'08
Pos	Rec	Yds	YPR	TD	% of Rec	Pos	Rec	Yds	YPR	TD	% of Rec
DEN RB	102	836	8.20	3	14.3%	NE RB	316	2,842	8.99	9	22.3%
DEN TE	164	2,009	12.25	16	23.0%	NE TE	218	2,539	11.65	31	15.3%
DEN WR	446	5,459	12.24	27	62.6%	NE WR	886	11,180	12.62	84	62.4%
DEN Tot	712	8,304	11.66	46	100%	NE Tot	1,420	16,561	11.66	124	100%

We took these numbers for the two years that Cutler started for the Broncos and the last 4 years for New England. What are striking are the similarities, if you look at overall averages.

As you can see, the Broncos and Patriots had very similar passing distributions in two areas - fullback and wide receiver. Fullback is a small consideration for each offense, and that may influence the used of certain players. Evans only received 3 passes his entire year (10 games). Morris subbed as a lead blocker at times.

Although stats showed the fullback passes over the 4 years notched a hefty 3.4% total for NE, that number is heavily skewed by 2005, where Patrick Pass (playing some RB due to injuries) caught 23 balls and Heath Evans 10. The following year, Pass only caught 2 and Evans 7. Over the next two years, with Pass gone, Evans only caught 4 balls in 2007 and then 3 in his 10 games of 2008. Clearly - as McDaniels ran the offense over time, the use of the fullback as a receiver declined to almost nothing.

If McDaniels isn't concerned with the fullback position as a rusher or receiver when he comes to training camp in Denver, he has precedent in his work with New England. Andrew Pinnock would be perfect in McDaniels' offense as it was run with the Pats. Not surprisingly, he survived the purge. For those of us who hope to see Spencer Larsen at linebacker and Hillis at running back/H-back, that's good news.

Both teams chose the WR option about 62.5% of the time, and it's safe to say that the WR pass was the primary approach of both passing attacks. The discrepancy that matters is between the TE and RB. Denver, under Shanahan and his coordinators relied on the tight end pass 23.0% of the time, but only threw to the RB 10.7%. McDaniels while at NE preferred to throw to his running backs 18.9% of the time, but went to the TE on 15.3% of the throws. This fact has been blown out of proportion, in our opinion.

Tight End Receiving Statistics - Broncos '07-'08 & Patriots '05-'08
Team/Year	Rec	Yds	YPR	TD	Lg	RPG	YPG
DEN '07	81	891	11.0	8	41	5.1	55.7
DEN '08	83	1,118	13.5	8	72	5.2	69.9
DEN Avg	82	1,004	12.25	8	56.5	5.2	62.8
NE '05	57	738	13.0	13	45	3.6	46.1
NE '06	81	1,037	12.8	6	40	5.1	64.8
NE '07	48	471	9.8	10	35	3.0	29.4
NE '08	31	302	9.7	2	29	1.9	18.9
NE Avg	54.25	637	11.7	7.75	37.25	3.4	39.8

Using the Tight Ends

The issue that many Broncos fans have is that this could mean that tight ends Graham et al (including Scheffler, who is training with the team and who they have said that they value) might be on the receiving end of less passes. In reality, we don't know anything of the sort. McDaniels has noted publicly that he likes the idea of using Scheffler's receiving skills. We only know two things - McDaniels was the offensive coordinator under Belichick, who utilized the running back pass 23% of the time. And, that style was inherited with some changes from Charlie Weis and it worked.

Notice that New England's passes to tight ends dropped from 81 in 2006, (the same number that Scheffler and Graham together caught in 2007), to 48 in 2007, to just 31 in 2008. Why? It might be because Randy Moss and Wes Welker, both far better targets, came to town, combined with the departure of Daniel Graham to Denver. Some have argued that New England isn't happy with tight end Ben Watson, but other than media speculation I haven't found specific evidence of that and there is some evidence to the contrary. The Patriots now have better receivers, so they get them the ball more. It's simple.

The Patriots' tight ends were very active in 2008, running a wide variety of sets with both 1 and 2 tight ends. However, they blocked, spread the field, created mismatches, chips and generally made life miserable for the opposing defense and caught only 8% less passes as a factor of the whole attack than did the ones in Denver, despite the fact that Watson was a disappointment to them in receiving and the other two were even worse in that department. Again, it's likely that McDaniels is just using what he has to best advantage. The second thing we do know is based in that McDaniels has been repeatedly on record as saying that his offense will be different from what he has done in that past.

If his offense will be so different, why do an extensive analysis? It's because every coach will make certain decisions and preferences based on what he has seen work. He will then make changes based on the things that his imagination tells him will work in the future. We can't know the second, but we can become more cognitive of the things that have been done, what has and hasn't worked, and what areas he might see as needs or options, as well as situation like the fullback receptions where there is a clear direction. That is what we will cover next, in our section on Down/Distance Play Propensities and Conclusions

Divining the McDaniels Way, Part 2 - The Running Game

Emmett Smith — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 17:30:09 -0000

Note: In light of Denver's trade of Jay Cutler to the Bears, we decided to push back the schedule of our series. Today we present Part 2, with Part 3 now scheduled for Friday, April 10th and Part 4 following on Tuesday, April 14th.

The Broncos Running Attack

In Part 1 of our look at The McDaniels Way, we provided a view of what new Broncos Head Coach Josh McDaniels may look to achieve on offense in 2009. Part 1 covered more of the general goals - higher efficiency of yards and point-scoring, better control of the game clock, and more success in red-zone and goal-to-go situations. Today, we will address the facet so many of us have/had strongly identified with Broncos football, especially with the noted successes of the recently-departed Mike Shanahan - the Denver running game.

As noted in NYC's The Fall of the Denver Rushing Attack, the Broncos' commitment to the run has waned significantly in recent years. After averaging 508 carries per season from 1995 to 2005, the 2008 Broncos only ran the ball 387 times. While they maintained a strong YPA (Yards Per Attempt) of 4.8, their relatively small number of carries led to fewer first downs via the ground game (103 versus an average of 125/year from 1995-2005) and poor clock control (28:43 in '08 versus 32:15 from '95-'08).

In terms of gross yardage, the falloff went from an average of 2,264 yards per season (1995-2005) to just 1,862 in 2008. The rushing attack also failed to produce big individual games, as the '08 Broncos only topped 175 rushing yards once, although that number was padded by a 71-yard carry by WR Eddie Royal on an end-around (in the crushing home loss to Buffalo, incidentally). Compare that to the Broncos of 1995-2005, who topped 175 yards in a game on an average of 4.6 times per season. Without the benefit of a strong running game, one which never even dominated a single game in 2008, the pressure was focused squarely upon Jay Cutler and the passing attack.

At first glance, the hiring of Josh McDaniels seemed only a continuation of Denver's move to a pass-dominant offense. This is certainly a natural and excusable assumption, as Tom Brady's 4,806 yards and 50 touchdown passes of 2007 quickly come to mind. However, it is important to consider that 2007 may have been an anomaly, a remarkable alignment of the stars which allowed for arguably the greatest offensive performance by a team in any one year. Even so, the '07 Pats ranked 9th in the NFL in rushing attempts with 451 and 5th in rushing touchdowns with 17; while not dominant rushing numbers, they certainly evidence a commitment to the run. The Patriots' 2006 and 2008 numbers show an even greater offensive balance, which we will share in a bit.

So, what can we expect of Josh McDaniels' Denver Broncos when it comes to running the football?

The O-Line

Performance of Pats and Broncos O-Lineman in 2008 and 2009 Season Age
	NE Starters	'09 Age	Starts	Sacks	Pen	Sks+Pen	DEN Starters	'09 Age	Starts	Sacks	Pen	Sks+Pen
LT	Light	31	16	7.5	1	8.5	Clady	23	16	0.5	3	3.5
LG	Mankins	27	16	5	2	7	Hamilton	32	16	2.5	6	8.5
C	Koppen	30	16	4.5	2	6.5	Wiegmann	36	16	1	3	4
RG	Neal(Yates)	33(29)	9(7)	2(6.25)	2(1)	4(7/25	Kuper	27	16	0	4	4
RT	Kaczur(LeVoir)	30(27)	14(2)	4(2)	3(0)	7(2)	Harris	24	16	2.5	2	4.5
Tot/Avg		30.2	80	31.25	11	42.25		28.4	80	6.5	18	24.5

The above chart is a position-by-position comparison of New England and Denver's starting offensive lines from 2008. Although it mostly deals with passing-down numbers, in some areas the chart gives us clues about rushing as well. Looking across the LT column, Matt Light will be 31 years old during the 2009 NFL season. He started 16 games in 2008, was charged with 7.5 sacks and 1 penalty was accepted and attributed to him. Continuing across are Ryan Clady's numbers. Looking below at the RG row, right guard Stephen Neal started only 9 games, while Billy Yates filled in for the other 7 games. Yates' stats follow Neal's in parentheses - the same goes for Mark LeVoir, who filled in for Nick Kaczur in 2 contests. The stats attributed to Yates and LeVoir are part of the Pats' total, in order to adequately compare the starting lines of both teams: 5 starters x 16 games = 80 starts per team. What also must be noted is that team sack totals do not match up with those sacks attributed to the offensive line. For example, many of us know the Broncos' quarterbacks were only sacked 12 times in 2008. However, only 6.5 of those were attributed to the starting linemen, while the balance were charged to backups, tight ends and to the quarterbacks themselves (coverage sacks).

The issue of injuries may explain some things that came up on video. After watching the six games of film, the only real surprise that Doc had was the uneven work of the Patriots' offensive line. He said,

"I was surprised at how poorly they played in certain areas. That made it hard to obtain or understand some of the info on tendencies. Often, the line wasn't effective enough in the run or, especially, in the passing game. And yet, that's hard to see if you look at the numbers - unless you look carefully.

I watched a lot of running plays that were blown up at or behind the line of scrimmage because the O-Line couldn't move the defenders. Often the runners managed to get small yards anyway, and that's more a tribute to the runners than anything else. The passing problems showed up more in the stats.

However, even after saying that I have to point out the other side: according to FootballOutsiders.com, NE had the 5th-best rate of being stuffed, at 21% (Denver was 1st at 17%). Denver had the #1 run-blocking efficiency - but NE was #2. Again - they are very efficient. But for the Pats, one reason that number is so good was that the RBs commonly broke tackles behind the line, fell forward and almost inevitably gained a couple of yards. They had a very tough group, and adding Jordan to the Broncos, knee surgery and all, is a great addition. They also had the best percentage of 1st downs per carry at 28.3% (Denver was second at 26.6%) even though they were fourth in the league for rushing attempts (513).

A lot of that was the scheme, and some of the rest could be attributed to simple effectiveness at carrying out assignments on the part of the RBs - and to Cassel, who ran often with 73 attempts and a total of 270 yards and a 3.7 average. In his two full seasons, Cutler averaged 50.5 rushes for only 202.5 yards, so the difference there is obvious.

You also have to look at where they run and run well, and where they don't. They weren't productive at left or right end, or at right tackle, although left tackle (except on pass pro) and the middle of the line plays were usually very good."

There are discrepancies between the New England offensive line's certain very good stats and their obvious failures. For example, they were 1st in the league for rushing 1st-downs with 145, but they were only ranked 19th-best in the league converting on 3rd-and-short via the run, a category that is telling for the line. The Patriots' offensive line was quite a mixed bag in 2008, and that showed on the film. We will talk about the passing side of their equation tomorrow but on the rushing side, Doc saw players who were missing assignments and who weren't getting to the second level consistently.

A brief look across the league shows that the Patriots' O-Line is older than the norm, and that the right side in particular saw a lot of injuries over the course of the season, which may be part of the reason that they weren't as good as expected. Their tackles are seven years older than the Broncos', on average. Even factoring in the advanced ages of Casey Wiegmann and Ben Hamilton, the New England line is two years older than the Broncos across the starting five. Their size/weight numbers are roughly comparable to the Broncos.

We asked styg50 about the issue of offensive linemen and aging. Was the gap scheme wearing on the players? Could age, at about 30, be the issue with their poor play, (especially on passing downs)? He said,

"My first thought, is that everybody is different, so some guys might not be affected while other guys are significantly affected. The main trait of the pulling guard(or center) is good footwork, and to a lesser extent the core strength to re-engage quickly on the move, which has "balance" as its primary indicator when watching them. It is reasonable to assume that as a player ages, his footwork might suffer and become "heavier" or slower, but I think this applies more to heavier linemen who stay heavy. O-Linemen are generally no stranger to heavy lifting and maintaining and increasing lean muscle mass, but as they age they need to be open to the idea of increasing flexibility and agility, which should always lean towards playing at lighter and lighter weights.

The plus side of aging as a pulling lineman, is that you have to be able to locate and line up your block, which becomes even more difficult if it is intended to occur at the second level, and that is more about experience than anything. Hamilton and Nalen were good examples of guys who could block out to the third level, which is exceptionally difficult for a lineman, and they could do it because of how quick they were/are and how savvy they are about lining up the block. Rookies and young players didn't stand a chance against them."

Regarding the Broncos, Styg added,

"As to zone-block increasing players' longevity, I think it has more to do with what players have been tapped for zone-block: smarter, lighter, more agile. The smarter could aid them in whole-body health, the lighter reduces Isaac Newton's effect on them, and the agile protects them in the game itself, helping them avoid contortion strains and the like. The zone-block seems as likely to me as any other system to expose players to abuse by virtue of the system itself, but HT can answer that question better than I can. What wears players out more than anything is going to the ground and having to get back up again (barring the occasional 79-yard fumble return, which is more about oxygen than anything) and that occurs a lot in zone-block."

HT (hoosierteacher) was kind enough to weigh in as well. His comments centered on two things - the abilities of the players in terms of balance and flexibility, and their abilities to work together:

"The Denver OLmen are culled from the masses because they have either the inherent ability or trained ability to use flexibility and agility from early on. Teams with less of a focus on pure zone-blocking will age less gracefully. "Big and strong" diminishes over time. Flexibility and agility, if maintained from an early age, can last much longer on the football field.

I hate to keep coming back to martial arts. I know you and Styg are experts in the field, while I'm just an amazed spectator. (lol). But you guys will appreciate the analogy. The old man who is a martial-arts master seems to have the advantage over younger men who are more physically fit. In MMA competitions, we never seem to see these old men. But I know that I've been to studios (dojos) where I've seen old (frankly ancient) guys who have techniques and experience to beat up on the younger guys present.

While football is a little different, there is a similarity. While age slows all of us, it is going to slow physical qualities (such as strength) quicker than skills that are harder to quantify (such as balance, agility, footwork). Teams that look for these types of players are going to have players with more longevity. They also get the boost of having players that play together longer, which is a key for any offensive line.

The only thing that really keeps too many teams from moving towards zone-blocking is the pool of players to draw from. When too many teams try to move towards zone-blocking, the pool decreases. The teams already established in ZB have enough players who have played together in the system, while newer teams will struggle because they have to get more players from the drafts. If enough teams could establish themselves, colleges (the suppliers) would feed the demand, but it would take several years. In the meantime, teams with successful zone-blocking linemen should hold onto what they have, needing only to pick up a player here and there."

Professor Barber, the master instructor who Doc had the privilege to train under in martial arts used to assure him that "old age and treachery will conquer youth and skill." Given that and the direction of our two resident experts, we suspect that the issues of injury to the lower body, combined with a need to frequently adjust to different combinations of players were at the heart of New England's woes along the offensive line.

On the other end of the offensive-line universe, Josh McDaniels has to salivate at the idea of installing his scheme behind what is arguably the best line in the NFL. They are mostly younger (and Casey Wiegmann still has great skills) with Ryan Clady entering only his second year and Ryan Harris just his third (second as a starter). Chris Kuper is looking at only his fourth season. Ben Hamilton is 31, and Wiegmann is pretty spry for an old man (Casey will turn 36 during training camp). Primary backup Kory Lichtensteiger is getting good early reviews in the middle, and Tyler Polumbus showed promise at tackle, even taking some reps at center..

Small wonder, then, that the Broncos' new coach kept Rick Dennison to coach the line and Bobby Turner to coach the running backs. Josh McDaniels is a very smart young man, and those decisions were probably not very difficult for him. The Broncos may need better depth, but the line is first-rate in its current incarnation. After watching this film, Doc appreciated it even more. So will McDaniels. You may not see another season where every Broncos lineman starts all sixteen games, but these guys are very, very good nevertheless.

Much has been made regarding Josh McDaniels' comments on instituting a higher level of 'gap' blocking as well as the zone-block scheme. It is important for the fan to recognize that Denver ran some solid gap-blocking last year, and that Hamilton and Kuper both excel in pulling; so the change should not be a concern. In fact, the reality is that no major changes are indicated. But McDaniels is sitting on something new in how the line and the running backs will function, and he so far isn't letting much slip. McDaniels only said,

"We did more gap schemes in New England, where we're going to pull a guard. The good thing about Denver is they've done those things, and they've got really good guards to be able to do that."

Watching the Broncos O-Line closely, both Hamilton and Kuper, light-footed as guards go, were pulling on several plays each game. The biggest difference Doc sees is that the Broncos were even better at it than New England was.

As an aside, a recent segment on NFL Total Access suggested that Ryan Clady will be the 'Surprise' player of 2009. We can only suggest that the hosts weren't watching much film, as Clady was arguably the great surprise player of 2008. The only shock that he could provide in 2009 is if he's not elevated from Second-Team to First-Team All-Pro.

Ryan Harris was nearly as good, and Denver's pair of tackles is equal or superior to any other set of bookends in the NFL. Kuper has turned into a fine young guard, and if Ben Hamilton is the Broncos' 'weak link' as some have stated, Denver has but some very small problems to deal with. Wiegmann's contract will likely be renegotiated to keep him in town for a couple of more years, and in that time the Broncos will have settled on their backups and groomed their new center. Lichtensteiger may be best at either center or guard, but Polumbus has taken snaps effectively at center as well as at tackle. The Broncos probably need one more good backup, and they have some options already on the practice squad. they will, if our member's drafts are any indication, take another in the draft.

The Running Backs

Rush/Pass Splits
	Rush %	Pass %
DEN '07	44%	56%
DEN '08	38%	62%
DEN Avg	39%	61%
NE '05	42.6%	57.4%
NE '06	47.3%	52.7%
NE '07	42.6%	57.4%
NE '08	46.8%	53.2%
NE Avg	43.1%	56.9%

In terms of total plays, New England ran the ball 46.8% of the time in 2008. Over the 4-year period of 2005-2008, the Patriots exhibited a 43.1% rush, 56.9% pass balance. Despite their pass-first reputed approach, they like a fairly balanced attack. Meanwhile, the Broncos were the second-most pass-reliant offense in the NFL, behind only Arizona and tied with New Orleans last season. Obviously, Denver's running back injuries and the elevation of Jeremy Bates to play-caller factored in. Bates' preference for passing was quickly obvious to even casual Broncos fans. That reliance on the pass placed a lot on Jay Cutler, but it also led to predictability in the passing game, which we will discuss in Part 3. Few fans will mind the fact that Bates won't be deciding if or when to run the ball in 2009.

However, it should be noted that New England also suffered several injuries to their offensive backfield; top backs Laurence Maroney, LaMont Jordan and Sammy Morris all missing significant time. This forced the Patriots to sign BenJarvus Green-Ellis from their practice squad and give him the bulk of carries for two games. Interestingly, their commitment to the run did not wane - with Green-Ellis as their primary ball carrier in weeks 9 and 10 versus the Colts and Bills, respectively, New England rushed 75 times and Matt Cassel dropped back to pass 70 times. This represents a 51.7% run/pass split. No, the Patriots' and Broncos' backfield situations were not identical, but New England's run commitment with a practice-squad running back may serve to lessen the excuse provided by Denver's injuries.

The acquisitions of running backs with a history of good receiving numbers (and comparatively low miles, despite the issues with Correll Buckhalter's or J.J. Arrington's respective knees) would tend to indicate that Denver will be moving to the New England-style of running back usage. Let's look at what that was last year:

The Patriots' top runner in 2008 was Sammy Morris, with 156 carries for 727 yards, for a 4.7-yard average (he also took some snaps at fullback). LaMont Jordan had 80 carries for 353 yards and a 4.5 average. Kevin Faulk had 507 yards on just 83 carries for an explosive average of 6.0 yards per carry. Meanwhile, 2006 1st-round draft choice Laurence Maroney had only 28 carries for 93 yards, and New England has made it known that they aren't pleased with the young back. Then you have little-known Ben-Jarvus Green-Ellis, who filled in brilliantly with 74 carries and 275 yards. They spread the ball around, and they ran to the tune of 513 carries last season. That's bad news for those Broncos fans that yearn for a 1st-round back pounding and dodging his way into Canton. It seems very unlikely to happen under McDaniels. But it's good news if you like a well-balanced attack.

New England has some great numbers. They are very efficient - They were 6th in the league in big runs (carries of 10 or more yards), with 55 such plays. They were only 10th in the league in yards per carry (4.7), but 4th in rushing touchdowns with 21 in 2008. They know how to score, and the Broncos will benefit from that knowledge. As you'd expect, they don't leave a running back in the game for long. Rotation is common and at times it is a constant. They are into ‘fresh legs'. Some describe an inability of the back to ‘get into a groove' when rotated. That's in opposition to the NE idea of doing a job perfectly in execution each time, regardless. Faulk was at times their first option, or Morris or even Maroney, but they ran a wide variety of plays for all the backs.

We should also look at the scheme that Denver employs. In his article Denver's Unique Running Back System, Doc noted that a Denver running back needs the following qualities:

They have to put the team before their own stats and ego.
They have to block, run routes, chip and receive well, in addition to their running skills and intelligence.
They need excellent field vision, defensive-scheme comprehension and the neuromuscular abilities to see and respond very quickly (advanced proprioception).
They have to put the coaches' knowledge before their own "I've done it this way my whole life" approach.
They have to be able to come in from the bench and do their jobs well immediately without needing to ‘get into a groove'.

SlowWhiteGuy wrote,

"I would add one quality that is essential for backs in the Turner/Dennison system. They must trust the system, more than their ability. There actually is nothing that unique about Denver’s zone-blocking system; lots of teams use ZB. What is unique is the way they combine it with the 1-cut system. Denver stresses that the back must wait to make his cut until the backside pursuit has been sealed off. Most backs want to cut into the hole as soon as it opens, but that’s not Denver’s way. In fact you will often hear complaints about runners being too slow to the hole.

One of the reasons that Denver selects back lower in the draft is that backs who are selected more highly tend to have depended on their athletic/physical skill set. They are reluctant to abandon what got them to the pros. Lower round backs tend to be less physically gifted and have made it through hard work honing their technique. They are used to succeeding through study and hard work. For them, trusting the system comes more naturally; it’s an extension of what got them to the pros."

Can the two systems mesh? Absolutely. Denver has gone out in the offseason and added running backs who they feel can integrate into the zone-block scheme, catch passes out of the backfield and block well. They may be running the draw, running up the middle, some to the sides, although less. They will be catching passes, blocking for the pass and creating mismatches. McDaniels said as much the day after the Cutler trade and we were predicting the same before he did. By the way, he was also praising Hillis. Doc feels better now.

Rushing TDs, First Downs, Fumbles
	Rush TDs	1st Dns	Fumbles/Lost
DEN '07	10	96	30/14
DEN '08	15	103	18/12
DEN Avg	12.5	99.5	24/13
NE '05	16	101	19/9
NE '06	20	121	27/15
NE '07	17	124	14/6
NE '08	21	145	17/10
NE Avg	18.5	122.75	19.25/10

More Rushing TDs - New England has certainly been considered a pass-first offense in recent years and rightfully so, but only to an extent. In the red zone, the Patriots went to their running attack to dominate their scoring. As mentioned earlier, they have shown more balance than Denver and have run for a lot more touchdowns than the Broncos in recent years. Remember all of those goal-to-go situations that resulted in the dreaded chip-shot field goals lately? Hopefully Coach McDaniels' new offense will put those memories to rest. We shall see.

The Patriots had an interesting stat as far as scoring touchdowns. The Patriots top 5 scorers broke down this way: Randy Moss led the team with his 11 trips to the end zone, while four running backs ranked behind him [Morris (7), Faulk (6), Green-Ellis (5) and Jordan(4)]. For Denver, the top five had Peyton Hillis and Brandon Marshall tied for the team lead with 6 total touchdowns, followed by Eddie Royal (5), Daniel Graham and Michael Pittman (4 each). Tony Scheffler and Brandon Stokley had 3 each. That should look very different at the end of the 2009 season - look for more touchdowns out of Denver's offensive backfield. When Tom Brady went down, the Patriots went from 17 rushing TDs in '07 to 21 in '08. As they always do, they adapted their game to the new QB and moved on, efficiently.

More Rushing First Downs - The 2008 numbers jump off the screen - The Patriots moved the chains 145 times via the ground game, while the Broncos only did so on 103 occasions. As NYC mentioned in his earlier piece, every Broncos team which made the playoffs under Mike Shanahan had at least 124 rushing first downs. Granted, that is a correlative statistic, but we can probably all agree that the Broncos need better balance on offense.

Given the number of yards that the Broncos rolled up in '08, you would expect at least an average number of rushing TDs. The lack of that, in our opinion, shows something other than the oft-mentioned 'injuries' excuse. The Broncos were rushing for 4.8 yards per carry. Failing to use the rushing attack was, in our opinion, more of a factor of the play-calling of Bates than any deficiency in the rushing game.

Making a more balanced use of the rushing attack will have the added benefits of eating more of the clock and resting the defense. We believe that McDaniels' greater experience as an offensive coordinator will benefit the Broncos in this area.

Fewer Fumbles - Even more so than interceptions, this statistic may be more about personnel than coaching, but New England has put the ball on the ground less than Denver, and hopefully things will change there as well.

Rush-Direction Propensity Broken Down by Gap - Broncos '07-'08 and Patriots '05-'08
	LE(5)	LT(3)	LG(1)	C(0)	RG(2)	RT(4)	RE(6)
DEN '07-'08	16.7%	13.8%	6.3%	30.2%	8.7%	11.8%	12.5%
NE '05-'08	11.5%	13.1%	12.9%	29.8%	14.1%	12.3%	6.3%

More inside running - Certainly this may be somewhat attributable to personnel, but scheme was the final determinant of where each team ran. Denver has run for the most part around and behind Ryan Clady, Tom Nalen/Casey Wiegmann and Ryan Harris/Daniel Graham. Meanwhile, New England has run behind their guards almost twice as often as the Broncos have. Of course the retention of offensive-line coach Rick Dennison and running-backs coach Bobby Turner will have a lot to say about the Broncos' running game, but look for McDaniels' single-back sets to get more use out of the 1- and 2-gaps than the Broncos have under Mike Shanahan's tutelage.

From the game films, the Patriots preferred in 2008 to use the draw play heavily and keep their running backs between the tackles. If a back went to the outside, they were usually going to receive, and when they ran there they weren't very productive. The screen pass was an effective weapon for NE and that's inline with their overall preference to keep passes shorter and completions high.

Using the Fullback

If McDaniels goes with the same ideas of a fullback in Denver that he used in New England, it is potentially a good role for Spencer Larsen, who noted that he was uncomfortable handling the ball: in this offense, he wouldn't need to worry. The Pats' fullback, Heath Evans, only had 11 carries for 23 yards over 16 games in 2008, or 0.7 carries per game. The rest of the time when Evans was used (about 1 play in 7), he blocked. The use of Evans in 2008 was basic and for the most part unoriginal, which struck Doc as odd given the range with which they used other weapons. For the most part, he was a blocker - period. While we would like to watch Larsen on the field more and would prefer him at LILB, we could see him being very effective in a Heath Evans-type of role.

Of course, if Coach McDaniels chooses to stay with the idea of a fullback who is essentially there to block, Andrew Pinnock may be the perfect choice, and that would free Larsen to do what we believe he does best - blow people up on special teams and play inside linebacker. Doc has been especially interested in watching this aspect, and he thinks that keeping Pinnock but letting some other backs go (Anthony Alridge, Alex Haynes and P.J. Pope) spoke volumes on McDaniels' part.

The use of Heath Evans is a good illustration of how the Patriots adapted their offense to the players available. Prior to picking up Evans in 2005 (one week after Evans was cut by Miami), the Pats were making use of a 5'10", 217-lb player, Patrick Pass, at fullback. Because of his size and skill set, Pass was greatly used as a receiver and had hauled in 23 receptions prior to being injured in November of 2005. Late in October, Pass was even used as a halfback due to multiple injuries to his backfield mates. However, the switch from the lighter Pass to the 250-pound, hard-blocking Evans eventually brought about a change of scheme.

Injuries to Corey Dillon, Kevin Faulk and Pass pushed Evans into an immediate starting role at halfback, and he excelled with 158 rushing yards on 33 carries in two games. He also was used effectively as a pass-catcher, very much as the Patriots had used Pass. Over the next three seasons, however, Evans got fewer and fewer touches, culminating in just 11 carries and 3 catches in 2008. From Patriots.com following the 2006 season,

"The 6-foot, 250-pounder has spent the majority of the season lining up as the fullback in the I-formation, where he has served as a lead blocker and short-yardage specialist, but has also expanded his role as a pass catcher, even lining up as a split end at times. He has been a big contributor on special teams and is also known as one of the friendliest players in the locker room."

McDaniels may not have liked him receiving, and may not have used him as a running back very much, but Evans was a versatile and effective contributor nonetheless. However, the limits of his use as a runner and receiver show a possible prejudice on McDaniels part, since Evans was a star running back in college, has run very well for New England and showed himself to be a good receiver in 2005. However, as time passed McDaniels' preference for using the fullback became clear - short yardage and lead blocking.

Many Broncos fans were disappointed that Hillis, when at fullback, was not used more as a receiver and in a Howard Griffith-type role before first becoming their star runner and then being injured. That was indicative of the change to Bates' system, such as it was. The modern fullback is being used less and less, both in NE and during this time frame in Denver. Eventually, we may see the change to a FB/H-back (for Denver, the pieces are there), but it isn't happening often or quickly, despite frequent comments about 'H-backs' in the media, a phrase that usually seems to simply mean a tight end who receives. That's not an H-back at all, but we understand what they are saying.

Still, change is the only constant. This year's draft is relatively deep in fullbacks. Andrew Pinnock, if he sticks, could get some competition in Denver, but it's not a priority. In 2008, the fullback slot went to Michael Pittman, then Hillis, then to Spencer Larsen, and to heck in a handcart by the time the season mercifully closed. Let's hope for greener pastures this year. Pinnock is just what McDaniels usually wants at the position - a strong blocker who is team oriented.

Balancing the Run and the Pass

When watching film on the Pats, the issue of run/pass balance came out in the difference between halves. New England was 26th league-wide in first-half runs called, 14th in the second half. These run/pass ratios are exactly the theories that went into building the West-Coast Offense, but despite a common misperception, the Patriots run a modern variant on the Erhardt-Perkins system. Their approach is less smash-mouth. It uses the pass more. However, since Erhardt is reputed to have said, "Pass to score, run to win", the McDaniels version of this approach (which was originally installed by Charlie Weis and has morphed and adapted to changes in personnel often since) uses the pass more in the first half and runs more in the second. A glance at their record also confirms that teams which have the lead in the second half will tend to run more.

But running the ball is often only half the battle on offense. Passing is the dominant attack for most teams, and both Denver and New England have exhibited that. On Friday, we will examine the passing game in Part 3 of our series.

MHR's 2008 Position Review -- Running Backs

Jeremy Bolander — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 22:12:24 -0000

Few positions among Denver's battered crew have as much controversy surrounding them, in regards to what they are capable of producing. NYCbroncosfan makes a strong case for limited production as a philosophical trend, and advocates addressing the running game by taking a hard look at the personnel, in order to cut the dead weight and replace with production where necessary. Even as he stated his case, the Broncos fired RBs PJ Pope, Alex Haynes, and fan-favorite, Anthony Alridge.

And that is just the beginning of the hard look.

What remains of the 2008 RB M.A.S.H. unit consists of change-up runners Tatum Bell, Selvin Young and Andre Hall. It also has the power styles of RBs Michael Pittman and Ryan Torain, as well as FB Peyton Hillis. As a wild-card, RB Cory Boyd managed to survive the first purge, while true FB Andrew Pinnock and converted MLB Spencer Larsen, playing at FB, rounds out the crew.

The reason RB is such a controversial position going into 2009 is because the number of variables cause the splits between the different camps to be amorphous and ill-defined. In defending one's opinion against one argument, a person finds that they actually hold an opinion they hadn't endorsed. One thing is quite certain however: the position was plagued by injuries in 2008. Try to follow along...

It started with Torain, Alridge and Hillis, with Hillis never getting enough reps in camp due to a lingering hamstring injury, Alridge and his own hamstring injury going to IR with what was called a sprained foot, and Torain breaking his elbow. Torain would eventually return on Nov.6th only to go to IR with an torn ACL. When Torain went down, Young was battling a torn groin he sustained 5 weeks earlier. It would sideline him for two games before he ruptured a disc in his neck and would be moved to IR, only a week after a hamstring injury IR'ed Hillis. Of course, they weren't alone on IR as Hall and Pittman had gone on IR earlier. Hall went to IR after a short season that featured 3 games limited by a wrist injury, 5 games limited by an ankle injury, and finally a hand injury that ended his season. Pittman had suffered through a broken rib after falling awkwardly on the ball earlier in the season but was finally sent to IR with numbness from a neck injury that wouldn't dissipate. Pope, one of the final pieces added near the end of the season would also go to IR for a hamstring injury, and even part-timer Larsen would suffer through bouts with a hip injury, and a groin injury that limited him as the season wound to a close.

A list like this can only stupefy and amaze, but at some point the shock wears off and you have to ask, "Did we bring this on ourselves?"

		Rushing						Receiving
	G	Rush	Yds	Y/G	Avg	Lng	TD	Rec	Yds	Y/G	Avg	Lng	TD
2008 - Tatum Bell	6	44	249	41.5	5.7	37	2	10	57	9.5	5.7	12	0

Tatum Bell literally came out of nowhere to help out for half a season. He occupied the change-up role as well as he ever did, but unfortunately, most of his actual production came only in the final game against San Diego, and frankly, that production came as a bit of a surprise. It wasn't that I was shocked to see him get a couple of long runs, it is that up to that point, he had shown that he was STILL a player who went backwards on first contact. He actually seemed like he was running with a little purpose, but one game is hardly a decisive sample, and the rest of the evidence contradicts his supposed value. Tatum has a much better attitude, mostly due to the reality check that being out of football provided for him, but he is still an underachiever who can't seem to realize his potential. When you add in that that potential fades every year, you will begin to understand why he isn't a strong candidate to end up in camp in 2009. While possible, it is more likely that Denver lets his FA status run its course without making an offer. His history of injuries, particularly his nagging bouts with turf toe, create a a situation where his roster spot may be more valuable than he is.

		Rushing						Receiving
	G	Rush	Yds	Y/G	Avg	Lng	TD	Rec	Yds	Y/G	Avg	Lng	TD
2008 - Andre Hall	8	35	144	18.0	4.1	16	0	3	25	3.1	8.3	11	0

Not a year goes by where Hall doesn't seem to feel the lingering effect of the high ankle sprain he suffered in high school. Most who have suffered from the injury can attest to its longevity, and for Hall it seems to crop up once a year. But outside of the ankle sprains he suffers, his hands seem to give him more trouble than anything. In 2008 he injured his thumb in camp, than hurt his wrist early in the season, which limited him in practice, and put him on more than one inactive list for a game, and though his ankle slowed him down, it wasn't until he suffered a undisclosed injury to his hand that he got placed on IR.

But of all the change-up backs, Hall may have the most talent, and he certainly has the strongest running style. His low profile protects him more than it hurts him, and he knows how to fall forward. Talk of fumble-itis may be levied against Hall, but outside of the back to back fumbles against NE, he hasn't had any problems in that area. And while injuries may be considered a concern for Hall, I am only worried about the ankles, because the rest is pretty ticky-tack and I firmly believe that it was his standing in Shanny's doghouse that kept him off the field and contributed to his IR more than the beat-up hands.

As an exclusive-rights free agent, I would expect Hall to be invited to camp with an easy-on-the-eyes contract, with an expectation of showing that he can still perform against competition. If he stalls out in camp, he won't make the opening day 53.

		Rushing						Receiving
	G	Rush	Yds	Y/G	Avg	Lng	TD	Rec	Yds	Y/G	Avg	Lng	TD
2008 - Selvin Young	8	61	303	37.9	5.0	49	1	3	16	2.0	5.3	8	0

In many ways, Young and Hall are mentioned in the same sentences. Though they were both signed to the active squad in the same year, and were both UFAs, Hall is actually a step ahead of Selvin in the development category, having played more college ball, and joined the Broncos a year earlier. But Young is the one tagged with being the better back of the two over the last two years, including being penciled in as a de facto starter several times, and even making the "Promise."

But Selvin has never risen to any of the lofty expectations placed on him, and it isn't just a trend limited to the Broncos. At Texas he missed 3 games in 2003 with a torn groin. In 2004 he missed the entire season with a broken ankle. In 2005 he injured his right ankle on two separate occasions, missing two games each time. In 2006 he missed a game with a left ankle sprain, and then missed two more games with a rib injury. In 2007 with the Broncos he injured his elbow and was limited in practice, and then sprained his knee and would end up missing five games as the season, and the Broncos playoff chances wound down and out.

2008 was no exception to this trend. In October he strained a groin muscle which would chronically limit him in games and practice starting in week 5. By week 10, he had completely torn the groin and was out for three weeks. When he finally returned, a solid hit would rupture a disc in his neck, sending him to IR. Folks, there is no reset button on the human body. Selvin is sustaining injuries at a rate that practically precludes the ability to recover, and frankly, the total is astonishing at this point.

But when healthy, there is no doubt that Selvin can produce. So much so in fact, that he was labeled a starter in waiting at Texas, behind Cedric Benson and by Mike Shanahan in Denver. His is a great story, about a kid who discovered how character can help you overcome adversity, but the production will never be there if we ask for too much.

Because Selvin is signed, there is no doubt he will be present in camp. If he is smart he will focus on nailing down the starting change-up back role, and do his best to stay healthy. The Broncos will probably only retain two change-ups, so he has little room for error, but he should still be able to make the team. But unless something drastic changes in regards to his chronic injuries, he is on the path out of Denver over the next couple of years.

		Rushing						Receiving
	G	Rush	Yds	Y/G	Avg	Lng	TD	Rec	Yds	Y/G	Avg	Lng	TD
2008 - Michael Pittman	8	76	320	40.0	4.2	20	4	10	112	14.0	11.2	40	0

Pittman has the kind of veteran mindset that a young team like Denver needs, and which was always coveted in New England. It is the mindset where a player runs each play like it is going to be their last, and where everything gets left out on the field. There is an excellent chance that McJedi will also covet it, but Pittman's free agent status may make the decision less than a slam dunk.

Before hurting his ribs, and then sustaining a scary neck injury, Pittman brought some much needed physicality to the Broncos offense. What the offense then lacked in versatility, it made up for by determination. But when good defenses keyed on Pittman, he began to take a beating. Though he is an older player, he has kept the mileage low while in Tampa Bay, and he has a good attitude towards his own health and fitness, so that trend should continue. But to get the most out of him, the reps will need to be kept to minimum, which means that he will be #3 at best on the depth chart. As the #3 he creates a standard that the starters will have to meet or beat, with versatility and drive, but in a rebuild, the luxury of stocking the team with great RB talent may not be there. As a #2, the value for Pittman and the Broncos simply isn't there, as he would take too much of a beating in that role, and be used up by the time the December football rolls around, when he will be needed most. If the Broncos plan on bringing in top RB depth, Pittman should be a keeper, but if they plan on going with what they have, Pittman will probably be let go to find a better situation, while the younger bruisers are retained, to take the beatings that are sure to come. Pittman reported after the season that he is 100% healthy, so the onus is on the staff to decide what kind of team they are looking to become as the Broncos move forward.

		Rushing						Receiving
	G	Rush	Yds	Y/G	Avg	Lng	TD	Rec	Yds	Y/G	Avg	Lng	TD
2008 - Ryan Torain	2	15	69	34.5	4.6	19	1	0	0	0	0	0	0

The biggest question mark hovers over Ryan Torain, who has played less football than I have over the past two years. He hasn't exactly been stocking shelves at Walmart, but he certainly hasn't been able to run full speed for some time. Starting in 2005 with the Sun Devils, he missed four games, and then in 2007 missed a total of nine games, including the final seven of the year with a fractured right toe and ankle injuries. In Denver, of course, he didn't get off to a hot start, with the worst news being the damaged ACL.

While people point to his very limited play against Cleveland as promising, I found that I didn't really like what I saw, including a nearly vertical running posture, and a lanky, drawn-out style that exposes him to too many different force angles. But there were pluses, including his vision and quick cutting ability.

After missing over 90% of critical practice time and game experience over the last two years, Ryan Torain is heading into a brand new offensive system, and is essentially a rookie all over again. Outside of working with Turner and Dennison last year, he has nothing going for him, and will need to bring everything he has to the table.

I can't imagine Denver cutting him before training camp, but any medical alerts about him should be weighted very seriously with regards to his future. I am hoping to see nothing less than "100%" and "Full Speed." It is very important that the RBs be ready to absorb McJedi's new offense starting with OTAs. Any holdup and the Torain Train may never make the station.

		Rushing						Receiving
	G	Rush	Yds	Y/G	Avg	Lng	TD	Rec	Yds	Y/G	Avg	Lng	TD
2008 - Peyton Hillis	10	68	343	34.3	5.0	19	5	14	179	17.9	12.8	47	1

There is little to be added to the discussion on Hillis that BroncoBear didn't already cover in his fantastic piece, Peyton Hillis: The Hammer in 2009? 61% of MHR users felt that Peyton had proven what he needed to in his action as a starter, in order to be considered the primary back in the new offense. I will try to limit myself here to looking at the downside of Peyton as a the projected starter.

In Peyton's corner you have his toughness, the vote of confidence from his Pro Bowl center, his tremendous hands, heck, even his choice of end-zone celebration endears him to the fans. The dissenting opinions are few and far, and there is little traction for a truly spirited debate about Peyton's potential. But one idea which can stand on its own is how Peyton's virtues of toughness, fearlessness and power coupled with his particular bruising style of play put him in harm's way as often as they help the team, much like Jay's take no prisoner's mentality frequently reverses the field for the Broncos. Peyton is a player who draws hits like a magnet draws iron, and the result is a battering that only he has the ability to stand up to. This style of play led to fractured vertebrae in college, but again his toughness shines through, with the injury sidelining him only half the expected amount of time.

In the final analysis I have only two concerns regarding Hillis. The first is whether he will be available for a December playoff run, due to the pounding he would take as a starter, and the second, which is intimately tied to the first, is that I question whether he would be used to his maximum potential if he were required to be lined up in the backfield as the main back all the time.

As much as I enjoyed his two games of toting the rock from the RB position, the game that really stands out to me is the Miami game, where Hillis occupied the H-back role that garnered him so much acclaim at Arkansas. It took advantage of his skills such as his hands and quickness in ways that simply will never be realized as a 1st-and-10 RB. The match-ups that he can exploit in the one-on-one scenarios afforded by the H-back role simply don't exist at the level of the trenches. Can he run in the trenches? Absolutely. So can Cutler, and for a very healthy yards per attempt, too. But is he at his BEST in the trenches? I would say no. Hillis can certainly patch up the running back position, but only at the cost of the kinds of production that force teams to game-plan around him, when they fear what he could do as he roams around the offense, lining up as a RB in short yardage situations, flaring out as a FB to be the uncovered 3rd down reception, lining up as a TE to pressure the seam, and lining up wide as a WR where no one accounts for him and he magically appears uncovered in the end-zone.

Bottom line is that Hillis is the surest option at RB currently on the roster. But he would be stepping down in production and worth to occupy that role. It would be the equivalent of lining Dallas Clark up at RB. I'm sure he would bring some physicality to the position, but then he wouldn't be available to destroy defensive schemes for Peyton Manning as a H-back.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

After the above group, the roster rounds out with RB Cory Boyd, FB Andrew Pinnock and FB/MLB Spencer Larsen.

As a FB, I don't know if Larsen catches onto the starters, but his versatility should catch the eye of McJedi. In a perfect world Larsen is in the running for ILB and we can forget this FB nonsense, but the fact is that he has experience at FB, and he struggled at MLB in very limited exposure. His Special Teams play guarantees a roster spot however, so he should be around through and after camp. Larsen was only adequate as a blocking FB however, and he has mentioned how uncomfortable he would be if he was ever asked to carry the rock. That may come to him with time, and as always, the hope is that his offensive skills can be left to the "trick plays" section of the playbook, and we all know what McJedi pulled out of his hat in that area while in NE.

Boyd is a project RB who failed a physical involving his knee when he was waived by TB last year. It is interesting that he survived the first wave of cuts, but as a late-season desperation signing one has to wonder how much longer he will hold on. He is currently sitting on an exceptionally valuable roster spot, even for the 72-man roster, so this will probably come down to Bobby Turner's evaluation of him.

Andrew Pinnock, the only true FB on the roster, may have his spot cemented from that fact alone, as he was never activated in 2008, despite Larsen having hip and groin injuries ahead of him. The potential is there, however, as Pinnock was never truly cut from SD. He was drafted to replace Lorenzo Neal under Schottenheimer, but LoNeal proved to be a durable commodity, and by the time he was let go, SD had moved away from that style of blocking FB, preferring the Hester style of, if I may be so bold, "wimpy" FB. Pinnock is a smart player, and has the speed and size to be a versatile FB. But if he were cut tomorrow, I don't suppose I would be terribly surprised.

Poll

Out of Bell, Boyd, Hall, Young, Pittman, Torain, Hillis and Pinnock, How many do you think will make it to the opening day 53-man roster?

All eight!

3 votes

Only seven.

3 votes

Only six of them.

13 votes

Five at most.

109 votes

Four. The rest won't make the cut.

187 votes

Just three, and you'll never guess which ones!

145 votes

Two, I can't believe we got by with these guys.

53 votes

513 votes | Poll has closed

A Few Good Questions With.....Lee Rasizer, Rocky Mountain News

John Bena — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 14:25:32 -0000

Another installment in our weekly series with Lee Rasizer, Broncos beat-writer for the Rocky Mountain News --

MHR -- Another week, another running back goes on I/R. What does the loss of Hillis do to the offense?

LR -- They'll try to plug and play with the likes of Cory Boyd and Tatum Bell, and maybe soon, Selvin Young. But Hillis' absence goes beyond just carries. He was a bruising short-yardage option and goal-line runner. He was good in blitz pickup. He also was dangerous as a receiver out of the backfield. I'm not really sure who inherits the short-yardage job, and that would be my primary concern. There's been some talk that Boyd has run physically at padded practices. That hasn't been Bell's game, or Young's, either, for that matter. So they'll need him to emerge as that guy to keep this offense humming. Spencer Larsen missed practice on both Wednesday and Thursday, so I think he might be out as a potential option. But Andrew Pinnock is ready to go and the ex-Chargers fullback has the size. So maybe he's a dark-horse choice. The team's keeping it pretty close to the vest. We'll all see Sunday.

MHR -- From the outside it would appear Tatum Bell would get a majority of the work, but I'm not so sure. What are you hearing about the preparation of Cory Boyd?

LR -- He's gotten some kudos around the locker room for his recent practices. But he also hasn't appeared in a pro game. That hasn't been the case with the other Denver backfield ‘short-timers,' even if guys like Hillis were fullbacks and not halfbacks before getting their chance. I talked to Boyd the other day to get a feel for him and he's a real humble kid who told me, in college, he was bound to play just about any role, running both inside and outside and catching out of the backfield. It'll be interesting to see if he's the latest out-of-nowhere guy who tears it up or just a plain ‘ol guy.

MHR -- Does the return of Jeb Putzier mean that Tony Scheffler isn't 100%?

LR -- I think it's a hedge in case Scheffler does get re-injured or isn't completely healthy, which I'm not convinced he is completely given how sparingly he's been used at times. But mainly it's a replacement for Nate Jackson, who's out for the year. Putzier has the versatility to align as a receiver in spread formations and has good hands. He's a less explosive version of Scheffler, in my view. Denver can now go with two blocking tight ends with Daniel Graham (though he brings something to the passing game as well) and Chad Mustard, or use Scheffler and Putzier in concert. It just brings more options.

MHR -- We all know how Mike Shanahan can't stand guys that have injuries that "linger". With that in mind, what is the story on Selvin Young? Why haven't the Broncos IR'd him already and moved on?

LR - While I do think there's an element of Young being in the doghouse some, his injury is a serious one. I've been told privately that his groin issue was actually more serious than the one plaguing Champ Bailey. But I talked to Young on Thursday and it's all getting back to football shape for him now, so, given all the injuries, it may be a good thing the Broncos weren't impulsive and placed him on the IR. The reason I think they didn't was because they believed his timetable would be shorter. Only problem was Young played in Cleveland too soon because the backfield was depleted and set himself back. I don't know how much of a role Young will play down the stretch. But he's practiced fully for two weeks and will soon be an option.

MHR -- Some say this could be a trap game for Carolina. What are your thoughts?

LR -- The Panthers are 7-0 at home and playing for homefield throughout the NFC playoffs. Denver can clinch the division and has won three straight on the road. I think both teams will be pretty focused. I know Carolina has the Giants ahead. But I believe Denver has the Panthers' full attention, given the Broncos' recent play.

MHR -- Latest on the injury front?

LR -- I believe Brandon Stokley (heel) will go. I think Spencer Larsen (hip/groin) will be out. I also think Champ Bailey (groin) won't play again. There's a chance D.J. Williams is back this week. He's been aligned in position drills with the starters and has been a full practice participant. But there may also be some subterfuge since Shanahan has quickly closed practice to the media before team period begins. So it's hard to tell whether having D.J. with Webster and Winborn is a ploy and Wesley Woodyard, maybe their best defensive player the last month, is getting benched. Williams believes he's healthy enough to play.

MHR University - Who Should Start, and Why

Steve Nichols — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 23:00:06 -0000

From Born Orange comes these excellent questions, which are at the heart of much discussion at Milehighreport.com lately:

What's become of K2? He seems to have fallen far from Shanny's grace to have both Larsen and now Haggan starting at MLB in Webster's absence (I still think we're better off without Web in the middle).

Also, what's your take on the status of some of the rookies/backups who've been doing a good job filling in for the injured starters, once the starters are healthy again- primarily the LBs and CBs?

When players go down to injury, a coach has a headache on his hands. If the back-up plays poorly, the coach has to make adjustments to cover for the weakness. If the back-up plays well, a controversy can be in the brewing.

Let's take a look at the issues in BornOrange's questions, and take a look at the thinking that goes into when (and whether) to bring back injured starters.

More below the fold...

Niko Koutouvides

First, let's address the K2 issue.

During the pre-season, Webster and K2 were locked in a struggle to determine who would start at MLB. Webster edged out K2, and the season got started. Fans quickly tired of Webster's missed gap assignments and his overpursuits. But he's an energetic player who fires up his teammates, and folks like keeping count of how many times his helmet flies off (I guess).

K2, on the other hand, is a speedy LB who shines making open field tackles on coverage units. Many folks (including me) were hopeful he would get a shot at starting. Keep in mind, though, that K2 had a shot at starting during the pre-season and during camp, and didn't beat out Webster.

Then came the injuries. K2 had a shot at starting, as did Larsen (who plays at MLB and FB). Larsen proved himself the better MLB, to such an extent that the Denver staff had him play both ways on the field.

In short, as much as some fans may not be thrilled with Webster starting, K2 just hasn't earned the position, having been beat out by Webster and Larsen (and even a virtual unknown Haggan). Sometimes the devil you know is better than the one you don't.

But what about starting Larsen?

Let's stay on the MLB position for a moment. Why isn't Larsen our starter? First, I'm going to grant that Larsen is probably the best MLB we have. But the situation for the coaching staff is more complicated than just "Who is the better player".

Denver has been losing a lot of games to a lot of bad teams throwing the ball "early and often" and "deep". The spread offense is a fine concept, but not for this Denver team, which needs to be pounding the ball after gaining a lead (the formula that has taken Denver to championships). Only lately, Denver has realized the folly of throwing too often (we hope), and discovered the talent of power RB Hillis.

Hillis faced one of the best run stuffing teams against the Jets. Keep in mind that he is a 7th round pick, was meant to be a FB, ran in single back formations (meaning no FB run support) and is somewhere around a 5th string RB for this team. Against the Jets, a lot of fans were reminded of the dominance of a true powerback. Hillis, who was a FB behind two elite RBs at Arkansas, still managed to prove himself in college as a powerful blocker, receiver, and runner. In the NFL, he proved that he deserves to be Denver's #1 RB.

So what does any of this have to do with Larsen not playing at MLB? He's needed at FB even more. Here's why.

Denver's FB Situation

Denver has lost a FB, but in a good way. Hillis is one of those "diamonds in the rough" that has been discovered by Denver. He is a one cut runner who plows over and through defensive players. For readers of Chalk Talk and MHR University, it has been preached time and again how a power running game is needed to wear down defenses, to limit interceptions (defensed can't exclusively play in pass mode), and to set up the break away runs of faster RBs.

With Hillis out of the picture at FB, Denver has only three options.

Play a lot of single back formations
Use Pinnock at FB
Use Larsen at FB

One is to play Hillis in single back formations (as against the Jets). This option worked very well, and took the Jets by surprise. A lot of fans would likely want to continue on this path. But it isn't good coaching.

The Jets assumed that Denver would be their regular pass heavy selves. When they saw three recievers and a single back, they played pass. Denver hit them right in the gut. As pointed out by a couple of astute MHR members, nothing kicks you in the stomach like a powerback charging into a nickle defense. If Hillis is the answer at HB (and I think most of us agree that he is), then teams are going to adjust for him quickly.

Teams were not ready for Jay Cutler and the wild spread offense, but they adjusted, and Denver suffered. The way to stop teams from adjusting is to play a balanced game, where the opposition can't load up a defense against a particular trait. Denver needs to have a FB in to block for Hillis, and also needs to run some pass plays with multiple receivers without a FB. Denver needs to mix it up, instead of relying on a single look.

In other words, we will need a FB in our system.

The second option is to use Pinnock. Who? That's right. A virtual unknown. With Denver near securing a playoff bearth, the time for experimenting is over. Pinnock was brought in because we lost a FB (Hillis, to the starting RB role). But he wasn't brought in to start. He was brought in to back-up Larsen in case Larsen goes down.

The third option is to use Larsen. If we use Larsen, why not use him at MLB too? He's done it already this year! Fans may disagree on the point I'm going to make, but here's the coaching thinking that is likely going into the decision.

Playing Larsen two ways is a fan pleaser, but it isn't good football. Larsen played two ways for Denver because Denver was short handed and desperate, not because they wanted to. Larsen beat the odds and played both positions, and did it very well. To do so game after game though, is to risk injury, not to mention an exhausted player playing at two positions (hurting both sides of the ball).

Like it or not, Larsen can only do so much on a weakened defense. As a FB, he ensures that there are no postions on the offense that aren't elite. Right now, ensuring that our un game can keep up with our pass game is what will make this offense unstoppable.

Take it from me. I'm all about defense, and I would be kicking and screaming to get Larsen in at MLB if I was the defensive coordinator. But for the sake of the team overall, I think Shanahan is making the right move.

What About Other LBs (Haggan, Woodyard, and Winborn)?

Let's assume the obvious. DJ Williams is going to start at WILL. He is a better run stopper than Woodyard, and has more big play potential. He is one of the true elites on the team, and plays his position better than anyone. He never lost his position when he went down. While the WILL position isn't primarily a run stopping position (it zones the weakside and blitzes more often than playing man), my point is that DJ does everything Woodyard does, and more.

Woodyard's best fit is at WILL. He is not really a true MLB, and has an excellent future ensuring depth at WILL and playing coverage for STs. Moving him to MLB would be an adjustment (something we don't want late in the season), and would weaken the depth at WILL.

Haggan is getting a lot of love from the MHR faithful, but there's a catch. He has played on limited downs, and it's hard for a coach to make a major decsion on very limited data. Haggan may have raw talent, but going towards the playoffs (where experience is everything), he just doesn't have a record beyond a few plays. As it is, He is listed as the third string at WILL (an excellent place for a LB with raw talent, but little experience with the team), but can also play third string behind K2 at MLB.

Winborn is the natural fit at SAM. He has played over the talent level of Boss Bailey (IR), and will likely keep his position unless he is bumped by a draft pick in the offseason.

What About the DBs?

This is the most complex issue for me to address.

Let's start with the easy part; Dre Bly. Dre Bly will return and keep his #2 CB position. Bailey and Bly are #1 and #2 in interceptions since 1991. They are both two of the best in the game.

Fans are leary of Bly, pointing out his seeming lack of production in Denver. But in the two years he has been in Denver, Bailey hasn't looked stellar either. I have attributed this to Denver's weak pass rush, and even more to the decision to put the strong safety in the box. (A story on this issue is coming up next week).

Yet, in the last game Bly looked great. Denver had two safeties in deep coverage (despite the rain). Coincidence? No way. Denver respected Favre, and played the right defensive alignments. This allowed Bly to be himself, and it showed. Bailey's return (hopefuly this week) should be a major boost.

But what happens at safety and at nickleback?

Tough call. Very tough call. Let's assume for moment that Denver finally decides to play two safeties out of the box. Lowry would likely have a better showing than his first outing, when he was one of the top tacklers for the Broncos, but whiffed on several tackles trying to guard the entire field horizontaly by himself. As much as I've defended him, I don't think he's the best option.

This leaves McCree and Barrett. Like most fans (I believe), I would like to see Barrett get the call. McCree has the experience, and could play well if he has another safety to take half of the field. Barrett has the advantage in speed and athleticism. All other factors being even (which they aren't), I would like to see Barrett developed. This close to a playoff run, it's a tough call.

At strong safety, Manuel has done a decent job playing in the box. Out of the box, in the Jets game, Fox came out looking like a winner. In my mind, we should play the strong safety out of the box, and play Fox (unless he proves the Jets game was a quirk). My uneducated guess is that Manuel will get the start.

For the safeties, in my mind, the big question is whether we go back to playing 8 in the box or if we go traditional.

At CB, the contenders for nickle are Paymah, Williams, Bell, and Jones. I don't know much about Jones. Bell looked good, but like Haggan, it was in limited action. The competition then comes down to Paymah and Williams, and I would guess Paymah gets the start. My guess is as good (or bad) as anybody's on this topic, and I'll bet readers have some good thoughts on why someone should start over someone else.

So how about it gang? What are your thoughts?

Poll

How many picks should Denver use on LB this reloading season?

None. Several of our back-ups should start next year.

13 votes

One. How can we pass on a LB in a good year for LBs in the draft?

157 votes

At least two. We need major help at LB.

49 votes

219 votes | Poll has closed

Broncos add FB Andrew Pinnock to roster

John Bena — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 17:52:23 -0000

WR Also Added To Practice Squad

Pinnock (5-foot-10, 250 pounds) is a sixth-year fullback who spent the last five seasons with San Diego, which released him on Sept. 1. He entered the NFL with the Chargers as a seventh-round pick (229th overall) in the 2003 NFL Draft from the University of South Carolina.

In 42 career games (3 starts), Pinnock has totaled 18 rushes for 56 yards (3.1 avg.) along with four receptions for 31 yards (7.8 avg.). He also has returned three kickoffs for 74 yards (24.7 avg.).

Pinnock saw time in 10 regular-season games and made the first three starts of his career for the Chargers last season, helping San Diego advance to the AFC Championship Game. He appeared in 12 games with San Diego in 2005 and played all 16 games with the club as a rookie in 2003.

During four years at South Carolina, Pinnock registered 422 career rushes for 1,852 yards (4.4 avg.) with 27 touchdowns. Named Mr. Football for the state of Connecticut at Bloomfield High School in Bloomfield, Conn., Pinnock was born on March 12, 1980.

Jayson Foster (5-foot-7, 175 pounds) is a rookie wide receiver who joins the Broncos after a stint with Pittsburgh, which released him from its practice squad on Nov. 6. He entered the NFL with Miami on May 1 as a college free agent from Georgia Southern University but was released by the Dolphins on Sept. 2 before signing with the Steelers on Oct. 14.

At Georgia Southern, Foster played wide receiver as a freshman and junior while competing as a quarterback during his sophomore and senior campaigns. He received the Walter Payton Award (best offensive player in Football Championship Subdivision) as a senior, throwing for 1,203 yards and 15 touchdowns in addition to rushing for 1,844 yards and 24 scores.

An all-state selection at Cherokee County High School in Canton, Ga., Foster was born on July 22, 1985.