SB Nation User Blog: SlowWhiteGuy

Zen and the Art of the Quarterback

SlowWhiteGuy — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 01:29:07 -0000

The quarterback seems to be the constant focus in football these days. The MSM harps on the importance of the "franchise" quarterback. Fans debate the merits of this QB or that. But unless you've played the position, I doubt that most fans, or pundits, understand what really goes into playing the position.

I think that QB, especially in the NFL, is the most difficult position in all of sport. Baseball may be dependent on good pitching, but the pitcher usually gets to set his own pace, choose his pitch, and only face one batter at a time. A soccer goalie must know where all his defenders are, and call out positions for them, but there is only one ball and one a few moments, though critical moments, where the goalie must come through. A hockey goalie is in a similar situation though the plays happen much faster. A shortstop may have to come through play after play, but no one is trying to take his head off on every play. Imagine how well Derek Jeter would play if a base runner were free to take him out on every play?

The QB must call the play, one out of dozens in the playbook, and know everyone's assignment. He goes to the line, with a clock running, and has to check the position of his ten teammates. Then he has to read the defense before the snap, remembering all the queues his coaches have instructed him in the week before. He receives the snap and steps out, retreating in a complicated crossover motion that must be executed fluidly and swiftly, making sure to not get his feet tangled in the feet of his lineman. If it's a run he must get to the right position and put the ball cleanly into the RB's hand without bumping him or pushing him off course. If it's a pass, he must get back to exactly the right depth, quickly read the defense, find the open man, and deliver the pass on target and out of the reach of defenders. The position is both physically and mentally demanding. the rate that stars from one level fail at the next highest level speaks to just how difficult the position is.

But there is a moment in time, that most good QB's have experienced, when the thinking stops, time disappears, and you just are the game. Suddenly the game slows down and all the other players seem to be moving in slow motion. You just know what everyone is doing, where they are going. It's as if you could play the game blindfolded. You just feel the rush, without looking, and calmly step aside. You now exactly where the open man is before you've turned your head. And throwing a perfect pass seems effortless. You almost feel sorry for the defense as you systematically hit the open receiver, carving them up play after play.

As fans we often look for obvious signs that the QB is playing well - completions, first downs, touchdowns. I would offer to the more discriminating fan a different perspective. The next time you watch a game, look to see which QBs seem to be in a Zen moment. Consider this in contrast to those who may be doing well but seem to be struggling to sustain their performance. If you've watched Brady or Manning you've no doubt seen times when they were just in the zone - times they seemed unstoppable. As a Broncos fan you certainly seen Elway in the zone more times than you can recall. As a fan you probably intuitively recognize this, even if you didn't know how to describe it. A QB just seemed to "be on his game."

If you watched Friday's game you saw times when Orton was on the verge of a Zen moment as well as times when he clearly wasn't. As the pre-season progresses, rather than just watching completions or such, trying seeing if he (or Simms for that matter) appear to be experiencing those moments of being in the zone to a greater extent. Look for how often and for how long, the game seems to be slowing down for them. Even a mediocre QB, when in the zone, will typically out-perform a "franchise QB" who is forcing his play.

The Shotgun, the Spread, and The Broncos - Part I

SlowWhiteGuy — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 00:35:38 -0000

Lately fans are hearing a lot about "the Spread." Unfortunately there is as much misinformation as there is accurate information. Sometimes it seems as if every time a quarterback drops back into the shotgun some announcer describes the team as going to the Spread. With all the conflicting information some fans may be confused by all this talk of the Spread. And perhaps more important, what does it mean for the Broncos. I hope to be able to give readers a much better understanding of what the Spread is, as well as what it isn't, in this first piece. Then in a second piece I will share what I think we may see from the Broncos offensively.

Much of the confusion about the Spread stems from different usage of the term. Spread can either refer to a formation or to an offensive system. Also, since it frequently is combined with the shotgun the terms are sometimes, incorrectly, used interchangeably. Let's explore these different terms.

Reeves, Shanahan, and the Shotgun

What is the shotgun? Essentially, whenever the QB lines up in the backfield to receive a direct snap from the center it is referred to as the shotgun. Many writers will tell you that the shotgun is the original formation in football, though that's not technically correct. Football originated from rugby and originally the center had to roll the ball backwards with his foot. The QB would then pick the ball up and lateral it to one of the other backs. In the late 1800s, the direct snap was developed and institutionalized in football. From the 1880s until the 1940s almost every team used the direct snap. This ended abruptly with the advent of the T-formation.

In the early 60s the 49ers briefly experimented with the shotgun formation but soon abandoned it. Then in the 1970s the Dallas Cowboys resurrected the shotgun. The Cowboys faced the Redskins twice every year. George Allen's nickle and dime defenses, coupled with substitution of pass rushing specialists, were frustrating the Cowboys on obvious passing situations. Landry countered by moving Staubach into the shotgun and substituting a 3rd WR. The Cowboy's shotgun offense reached its apex in the 1975 NFC Championship game. The LA Rams were heavily favored over the Wildcard Cowboys who had upset the Vikings on the original Hail Mary Pass. The Cowboys unveiled a shotgun heavy offense that included frequent runs out of the gun, including the shovel pass, resulting in a stunning 37-7 upset. The OC for those Cowboy teams was Dan Reeves.

When Dan Reeves was hired as HC by the Broncos he brought his shotgun offense with him from Dallas. In the 80s Denver was one of the few teams, beside Dallas, who used the shotgun extensively. Reeves hired an innovative OC named Mike Shanahan from the University of Florida. Among many innovations that Shanahan developed were several refinements to the shotgun offense. In a memorable MNF game the underdog Broncos faced a heavily favored Chicago Bears team featuring their ferocious 46 Defense. Like the Cowboys in 75, Shanahan brought out a shotgun heavy game plan featuring many runs from the gun. The Bears vaunted defense was befuddled and the Broncos shocked everyone with a 31-29 upset. Eventually every NFL team adopted the shotgun for obvious passing situations.

Since the QB is already lined up in the backfield it makes reading the defense easier and provides slightly better pass protection. However, many teams believed that you couldn't run from the shotgun, despite the evidence to the contrary. While the shotgun is frequently associated with the Spread, a team can run a spread without being in the shotgun and teams can line up in a shotgun without being in a spread. Neither the Cowboys, not the Broncos, used spread formation very much in their shotgun offenses. So if the shotgun isn't the Spread, what is the Spread?

Dutch Meyer and the Spread

Many announcers talk as if the Spread is something new. In 1952, coach Dutch Meyers of TCU wrote a book entitled:

via www.directsnapfootball.com

His opening line, "Spread formations are not new to football." In fact coach Meyer created the spread formation in 1934. Using his spread offense, from 1934 to 1952 Meyer's teams compiled a 109-79-13 record. TCU played in six major bowl games - 3 Cotton Bowls, 2 Sugar Bowls and one 1 Orange Bowl at a time when bowl games were few. His 1938, 1944 and 1951 teams won Southwest Conference championships, and the 1938 team finished 11-0, outscored opponents 269-60, and was selected as national champion. Hall of Fame QB Sammy Baugh said of Meyer:

Dutch Meyer taught us. All the coaches I had in the pros, I didn't learn a damn thing from any of `em compared with what Dutch Meyer taught me. He taught the short pass. The first day we go into a room and he has three S's up on a blackboard; nobody knew what that meant. Then he gives us a little talk and he says, `This is our passing game.' He goes up to the blackboard and he writes three words that complete the S's: `Short, Sure and Safe.' That was his philosophy - the short pass. "Everybody loved to throw the long pass. But the point Dutch Meyer made was, `Look at what the short pass can do for you.' You could throw it for seven yards on first down, then run a play or two for a first down, do it all over again and control the ball. That way you could beat a better team

So if the Spread was so successful why did it disappear? In the words of coach Meyer:

Just one word of warning. Some teams have tried the spread as a surprise element - putting on only a few plays and passes in the hope of catching an opponent unaware and unprepared. And it has worked fairly well at times, too. But to get the full benefit of the spread, it must be installed as a principal formation and must be developed so that advantage can be taken of any weakness developed in the defense.

Some teams, stopped cold on the few maneuvers given off a spread setup, have given up in disgust and returned to their "main stuff." This may have happened even though the few spread plays used disclosed some glaring weakness in the defense encountered. Sometimes the failure is due to the fact that the blockers had not worked enough with the idea to master the flexibility of assignments.

To be really successful, a spread team must be equipped with enough weapons to hit every weakness and the players and the coaches must study the setup thoroughly."

TCU's Spread looked like this

via www.directsnapfootball.com

Mouse, Tiger and the Run and Shoot

The next evolution in spread offenses was the Run and Shoot inspred by high school coach Tiger Ellison and refined by Mouse Davis. Ted Bartlett has already written a fine history of the RnS as it relates to the spread so rather than bore you I will just refer to his post. The RnS used 4 WRs with a single RB in the backfield. Half rolls and sprint-outs were used to compensate for the reduced pass protection. Very few NFL teams were willing to put their QB at risk. The lack of TEs made it difficult to run inside the 20, where the back of the end zone acts as a 12th defender. Also the rise of zone blitzing made protecting the QB too difficult in traditional RnS systems.

While the RnS has practically disappeared (except wherever June Jones is) many of its concepts have been assimilated into other systems. Ellison developed the RnS by watching kids on the playground. One of the principles in RnS is "run to the open grass." This is implemented through what are called Choice Routes. As the name implies, the receiver has an option between routes based on what the defense does. An example is the middle-open (MO)/middle-closed (MC) choice route. Essentially a TE or SR pushes up the seam and reads the middle of the field. If a safety is playing middle (MC) he will run one route, e.g a square out or curl. If there's no safety in the middle (MO) he runs another, e.g. post or cross. RnS teams also used lots of switch routes and crosses to create confusion in the secondary. Most of these concepts are used by teams today. When Mike Martz developed the "Greatest Show on Turf" he essentially implemented RnS concepts into a Coryell system.

BYU the Airraid and the Modern Spread

While Mouse Davis was developing the Run and Shoot another innovator, Lavell Edwards, was at work in Provo, Utah. While a 300 or 400 yard day passing is not that unusual today, in the 1970s it was unheard of. Yet under LaVell Edwards BYU QBs routinely racked up such perfomrances. Edwards wrote:

I decided to throw the football, not just the normal 10 or 15 times a game but 35 to 45 times per game on any down from our own end zone to the opponents end zone. The only success we had ever had at BYU was when Virgil Carter was our quarterback (in the mid 1960’s) and we threw the ball.

The BYU pass offense is based on a timing system. We design the quarterback drops, route depths, and protection schemes so that the quarterback can throw the ball in a specific timed sequence. If the defense and coverage will not allow us to execute our rhythm or timing, then we convert our attack with route adjustments. We want to throw the ball upfield by attacking the vertical seams created by coverage and the horizontal seams created by using our running backs in a flare-flood control concept. By doing this we can still be a ball control offense and take advantage of what the defense is giving us.

We have five basic tenents in our passing game. First, we must protect the quarterback. Second, we want to play ball control football, primarily with the forward pass. Third, it is important to incorporate an effective running game with the passing attack. Fourth, we will take what the defense gives us. Fifth, we as coaches must constantly KISS the offense (Keep It Simple Stupid).

In the 80s Hal Mumme was an offensive coordinator at UTEP. Mumme watched those prolific BYU teams and emulated them. When he became HC at Iowa Wesleyan, then at Valdosta State, he worked at implementing the BYU offense from a shotgun spread formation. Working with Mike Leech they developed a pass first offensive system called Airraid which they took to Kentucky in 1997. Soon HS and small college teams were implementing the Airraid. Weaker schools were consistently upsetting stronger programs. The keys to the Airraid were the essential BYU concepts it employed. A few plays, practiced to perfection. Simple concepts made to look very complex to the defense. And probing for weaknesses then exploiting them.

As an example of the concept of simplicity made to look complex, imagine a team with only five pass plays. But if each of those plays have 5 options, and each play can be run out of 5 different formations, then to the defense it looks like 125 different plays. The offense can practice 5 plays to perfection while the opposing defense has to prepare for 125 different possibilities. When Leech took the Airraid first to Oklahoma, then to Texas Tech it became mainstream in the NCAA.

Rich Rodriguez and the Spread Option

While Hal Mumme and Mike Leech were creating havoc in the SEC with their Airraid attack an OC at Auburn was paying close attention. When Tommy Bowden was hired as HC at Tulane he in turn hired an OC named Rich Rodriguez, from a tiny school in WV, to implement a spread offense like he had seen from Kentucky. Rodriguez was originally a Veer coach but he was hired to implement a Spread so that's what he did. But as he studied the Spread and came to understand it better, he also realized he could implement a Veer type option game from the shotgun spread. When Rodriguez was hired as HC at WV he had the perfect opportunity to fully develop the Spread Option attack. This is the offense that Urban Meyer has so successfully used at Utah and at Florida. Although Meyer has added a number of his own improvements to it.

Randy Walker, Northwestern, and the Zone Blocking Game

While Rich Rodriguez was still an Airraid guy he received a visit from Randy Walker of Northwestern. Walker had taken over the Northwestern program but was struggling to complete in the Big 10. While he had a very successful zone-blocking running game, the passing game was not as successful. As Walker discussed the Spread he had an epiphany. The Spread was to passing what ZB was to running - spread the defense out and attack the holes as they develop. Joe Tiller had already implemented the spread at Purdue so Walker had seen what it could do for a passing game. He decided to integrate it into a running game as well. In November 2000, Northwestern shocked the big college football world when they upset National Champion Michigan 54-51. While upsets happen in football the nature of this upset was what was so shocking. Lightly regarded Northwestern put up 54 points on a very powerful and talented Michigan defense. In the process they racked up over 650 yards of offense - 322 yards passing and 332 yards rushing. 332 yards rushing! The Spread was no longer just a passing offense. A serious running game could be conducted out of the shotgun spread formation.

5-2 Defenses, Hybrids and the Future

SlowWhiteGuy — Fri, 29 May 2009 21:40:55 -0000

Over the past few months I have repeatedly made the comment, "stop thinking 3-4 and think 5-2." That's a vague statement; what does it really mean? Let me describe the evolution of my own thinking before getting into what I meant by that statement. Last January I went over the state of Denver's defense and my thoughts about our needs here, here, and here. Once it was announced that we would be shifting to a 3-4 defense one of the biggest question marks I had was what to do with tweeners like Doom and Moss who didn't fit well in a traditional 3-4 scheme. Then we signed Reid, another tweener and drafted Ayers yet another tweener. Word from OTAs was that Crowder was also being tried out at LB with the rest of the tweeners. What the heck were the Broncos thinking? Then I got some insight - the Broncos weren't planning on a 3-4, at least not what most people think of when they think of the 3-4. They were going to run a variation of the old 5-2 for their base - at least that seemed to be a useful way to think about it.

The Oklahoma 52

In the old days of football players played both ways. Defensive formations were a mirror image of the offense using the same players. Most offenses used 7 players on the line and 4 backs so most defenses had 7 players on the line and 4 defensive backs. When teams were running the single-wing this worked out well enough. Then along came the T-formation.

The T-formation introduced significantly more fakes and misdirection. Teams were finding that their defensive line, especially the interior linemen, were getting caught inside and long gains to the outside became more frequent. Bud Wilkinson, head coach of the Oklahoma Sooners had a solution. Wilkinson had his two defensive guards stand up and back off the line to back up the defensive line. The modern linebacker was born. With his new 5-2 defense Wilkinson's Sooners ran off a 31-game winning streak from 1948 to 1950. After two off years they then ran off a 47-game winning streak from 1953 to 1957. Over an 11 year period the Sooners went 107-8-2. To put this is perspective, no other team in NCAA history has ever won more than 35 games.

Wilkinson had a defensive assistant, Chuck Fairbanks, who went on to become head coach of the Sooners and later head coach of the NE Patriots in the NFL. Fairbanks made further adjustments to the system. First he had his defensive ends stand up so they could read the backfield better and drop off into coverage. Later he replaced the DEs with LBs and the modern 3-4 was born. Even today many Division 2 and HS teams run variations on the Oklahoma 5-2.

So Denver's gonna run a high school defense?

No we did that last year. I don't actually think the Broncos will run a 5-2 defense. But it provides a useful metaphor for looking at their off-season moves. And it's not without precedent. When Joe Collier first instituted the 3-4 in Denver he was blessed with an amazing linebacker corps - Jackson, Swenson, Gradishar, and Rizzo may have been the best linebacker corps ever assembled. Even with this amazing group, Collier didn't blitz that often. Primarily he relied on his D-line, Alzado, Carter, Chavous, Smith, etc, to bring the heat; and they did.

Eventually the studs that made up the Orange Crush succumbed to age, injuries, or other distractions. Collier, always the innovator had to adjust. As he looked to adjust he found two defensive linemen, Karl Mecklenburg and Simon Fletcher. Both were great athletes, great defenders, though undersized for the D-line. Collier turned both into "linebackers" but not just ordinary linebackers - hybrid linebackers. He would move them around, line them up on the line, back them off, use them to rush the passer or drop them into coverage. They disrupted the defense while Jackson, Ryan, Dennison, Brooks, Croel, would race around making tackles. Collier found a way to put 5 linemen on the field with only 2 true linebackers and create havoc for opposing teams. An active participant in this defensive madness was then Linebackers Coach Mike Nolan - the current DC.

Thanks for the History Lesson But So What

Well while most observers have been wondering what Denver was going to do with all those misfit tweeners, the Broncos have been out acquiring more instead of picking up the linebackers they really needed. Why? Well maybe they they don't think they need more linebackers. What if the Broncos want tweeners? For a moment consider what a base 5-2 defense would look like: NT - Fields and maybe Thomas or Powell; DT they have Peterson, Thomas, Clemons, McBean, etc. Inside LB they have Davis, DJ, Larsen, Woodyard. And on the outside they have these hybrid DE/LBs - Doom, Moss, Crowder, Reid, Ayers. As a base defense that's close to a ton of run stopping beef combined with some serious speed. In a pass rushing scenario there's some major protection problems that Arid just won't solve.

Base defense - what's that?

Prior to the 70s NFL teams played the same 11 players on defense, in the same formation, for almost the entire game. This was changed largely by George Allen and Tom Landry. Allen was the defensive coordinator for the Bears and later head coach for the Rams and the Redskins. Allen noticed that opposing offenses would often find themselves in obvious passing situations. Knowing that the opponent had to pass, Allen would bring in a 5th defensive back or "nickel" back. (He actually stole this idea form the Eagles, but since Allen was the first to make it an integral part of his defensive system he is generally given credit for it).

When Allen coached the Redskins, Tom Landry would face his nickel defense at least twice a year. Landry countered the nickel with the Shotgun formation and 3 wide receivers. Allen countered with the Dime back, etc. Soon every team in the league was using nickel and dime packages. By the late 80s situational substitutions, special player packages and formations were the rule. Some teams, like the Bengals and Bills resorted to no-huddle offenses to keep these situational defenses from being deployed.

Today, situational defenses are still the norm. Most teams have packages for obvious run situations, obvious passing situations, red-zones, etc. Still, every team has a basic package that they tend to resort to more than others, their base package or base defense. Teams will use their base defense on 1st and 10 or other essentially balanced down-and-distance combinations such as 2nd and 5-to-7 yards to go. But when discussing the Broncos, or any other team, it's helpful to remember that teams only use their base defense about 40% of the time. The rest of the time they are in one of their specialty packages. Hence a 4-3 defense may look like a 3-4 in certain situations. If you watched closely, the Steelers were often in a defense that looked like a 4-3 many times during the Super Bowl.

So Where Does Boss Play?

Actually I wouldn't be surprised if Boss winds up on the PUP list, but that's not the point. With the 5-2 concept I envision, the Broncos can show a bewildering array of different fronts with creative substitutions. Back the DE/LBs off the line and you have a traditional 3-4 look. Pull either of the DE/LBs for a true LB and you have a 4-3. Pull the NT or a DT and you have a different 4-3 look. The combinations are almost endless. Who does the offense block in pass protection? Add in some zone blitzes (Thomas already has 2 INTs in his career) and the challenges become even greater. Suddenly all those tweeners aren't misfits - they're assets.

When you think about it, the very moves the MSM has criticised start to make sense.

A special thanks to hoosierteacher for his assistance with this article.

Where do Broncos go from here?

SlowWhiteGuy — Thu, 02 Apr 2009 04:54:34 -0000

Where do Broncos go from here?

Jeff Legwold resurfaces with a fine article on the whole Cutler saga.

How Bad Can it Be?

SlowWhiteGuy — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 18:13:36 -0000

In my career as a project manager I have had day, weeks, even months when it seemed like everything was going to heck in a hand basket. In those times I always found it helpful to ask myself how bad could it really be. As Broncos fans the last 10 days seem to be one of those trying times. So I ask myself, how bad can it really be?

Worst Case

At this point probably our worst case scenario as fans is that Jay Cutler will somehow force the Broncos to trade him to another team. Let me stress - I AM NOT ADVOCATING TRADING JAY - But, in my opinion this does represent a worst case scenario.

For many of us, Cutler has become, in our minds, the QB who is going to lead us back to the promised land. Certainly Mike Shanahan seemed to believe that. It feels like if Cutler leaves there go our dreams as well. But is that necessarily so?

How Bad Is That

To be sure, Jay is the most talented QB we've seen since John Elway, possibly the most talented young QB in the game today. However, do we really need a great QB? Ben Rothlesburger has one two and while he's decent, I don't think anyone considers him great. Jim Plunket also one two. Trent Dilfer, Jeff Hostedtler, Jim McMahon, Doug Williams have all won the big game and I don't think anyone even considers the hof when thinking of those guys.

John Elway may be the greatest ever, but he couldn't get it done without the supporting cast. Once that cast was assembled they may have been able to win both Super Bowls without Elway. (Even with Elway they couldn't beat Jacksonville in 96 without TD) So maybe it's premature to close Dove Valley and write off the season.

What About A Trade

So what if JC is traded - what would that mean to the team? While it's difficult to find out the actual details of the trade that didn't happen, What I've read leads me to believe that Tampa was willing to part with their #1 (19th) and either their 2nd or their 3rd (I've read both). I think it's quite conceivable that the Broncos could get a 1st and a 2nd for Cutler and possibly a conditional 3rd.

Who might make that trade? Tampa Still seems interested if you believe their local papers. Rumor is that Detroit is as well and possibly the Jets. I wouldn't want to see Cutler in the AFC but I could live with any of those.

What Would We Do

Well it's intriguing to consider just what we might do with an extra 1st and 2nd pick. For one thing we could fix the NT position. I think Fields is a good fill-in. But we really need a dominant NT. Maybe Cleveland could be convinced to give up Shaun Rogers for a 1st and a 3rd. Or maybe we could trade up to where we could draft BJ Raji ~~Bell~~. Rogers would make more of an immediate impact, but ~~Bell~~ Raji might be a better long term investment.

We could also look at the QB position. I think Simms could be an adequate caretaker, but I would feel better with a higer quality QB. We might also be able to trade up the get Stafford or White (I prefer White but others may disagree). Alternatively, the Cardinals have an problem with Matt Leinart now that the've signed Warner to a new deal. We could trade for Leinart. I think Leinart was overrated coming out of USC, but all indication are that he was a better QB than Cassel. Maybe it could work.

Do I think either of these two QB alternative are better than having Cutler? Of course not! BUT, fixing NT and bringing in a QB could actually be bette than keeping Cutler. And it's probably no worse. At least with a good defense you can stay in games.

Poll

So, how bad do you think it could be?

The sky is falling; the sky is falling....

24 votes

It sucks for now, but it will probably work out,

55 votes

This whole fiasco could actually work out in our favor.

22 votes

101 votes | Poll has closed

Tony Sheffler Trade???

SlowWhiteGuy — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 00:47:42 -0000

Lately there's been a lot of talk about the Broncos trading Tony Scheffler, but as they say in reporting, are there any legs to this story?

The Scheffler on the trading block rumor seems to have begun with a story by Denver Post writer Mike Klis on March 3. In an article on the Cutler trade situation he writes:

"An NFL source said Scheffler's name also has come up in trade discussions."

What does that mean, his name has come up in trade discussions? Does that mean the Broncos are actively trying to trade him? Does it mean other teams have approached the Broncos about trading him? Does it mean two guys in the mens room at NFL HQ were discussing possible trades for their fantasy teams? Klis goes on:

"What has Cook (Bus Cook Scheffler and Cutler's agent) heard about the possibility of Scheffler being on the block? `Not much, other than all players are subject to being talked about in a trade, I guess,' Cook said. `If Jay Cutler can get traded, anybody can.'"

Well that's enlightening (not!)

Klis added to this rumor in an article on Tuesday, March 4.

"The Broncos have been shopping Tony Scheffler. Scheffler, 26, is considered one of the NFL's best receivers at tight end — his average of 16.1 yards per catch led all players at his position with at least 40 receptions last year.

However, there is concern Scheffler might not fit in the New England offensive system that new coach Josh McDaniels has brought with him to Denver."

Now we don't even get the "NFL source" it just seems to be based on speculation about what kind of system McD will run next year. Klis continues on Wednesday, March 5:

"The Broncos also have nine picks in the April 25-26 draft, and they have been trying to trade Tony Scheffler, whose "receiving" tight end position gives way to a third receiver in the "New England" offensive system McDaniels is installing."

Again, no more information other than now he knows that Scheffler doesn't fit in the offensive systems that he knows McD is installing. In the meantime, while RotoWorld repeated the Post story, no one in the national sports media seems to be picking up this story. Today Klis's compatriot at the Post adds:

"Cutler's best friend on the team, tight end Tony Scheffler, is on the trading block."

Wow, that's a lot of certainty. Hope those guys in the mens room were correct.

Today Sayre Bedinger, who also posts here sometimes, posted this on Bleacher Report:

"While a rumor was invented via BroncosFreak.com that the Browns could potentially become trade partners with the Jay Cutler fiasco, another trade rumor could surface in the coming weeks or months involving these two teams.

It has been speculated that the Broncos are shopping tight end Tony Scheffler, who has been a backup in Denver since the signing of Daniel Graham.

The Broncos only have two tight ends as it stands right now, but there is talk of converting running back Peyton Hillis back to his normal fullback/h-back position which would leave Scheffler the odd-man out.

Undoubtedly, the Broncos couldfind a spot on the field for Scheffler, but there is nothing wrong with speculating on trade rumors at this point in the season."

For my money Sayre seems to have captured the essence of this story. In the absence of any news, the reporters seem to be making up news. What do they have to lose with their speculation. If he is traded they have a scoop; if not they can always say they only said there was talk of a trade.

I'm sure that if another team approached the Broncos with the right offer they would consider trading Scheffler. But that's true of about half the players on the Broncos, anyone with one year left on the contract. But let's not get too worked up over these rumors until some reputable sources start giving us some tangible facts.

Poll

What's your opinion on the Scheffler trade rumors?

It's all over but the crying

10 votes

It's possible but nothing definate is in the works

61 votes

It's a complete fabrication of the media

32 votes

Who cares; can't we just get on with the draft

8 votes

111 votes | Poll has closed

Why Marshall may not get suspended

SlowWhiteGuy — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 18:41:35 -0000

Like almost everyone, when I first read about Brandon Marshall's latest run-in all I could think was, "Oh well, here we go again." And, like most of the media and members of MHR I assumed that he would probably get suspended. However, after looking into this matter in greater depth I think there is a good chance he doesn't.

Let me emphasize that, in no way am I saying whether Marshall should or should not get suspended, simply whether I think he will. Here are the reasons I think he will not:

1. A judge dismissed the case. Often in these cases of celebrity run-ins we read that the charges were dropped. But that's not what happened in this case; the case was dismissed. I asked an attorney friend about this one and she explained that there is a huge difference between the two. Often a DA will drop the charges because they don't believe it's worth their time, or they cut some deal with the celebrity. But in this case a judge reviewed the evidence and determined that there was no offense. Either the police officer's account was not credible or, even if true, did not constitute the offense Marshall was charged with. Marshall's attorney said as much. Roger Goodell will have a hard time overruling a judge.

2. What Marshal was charged with, disturbing the peace, is a petty misdemeanor on the order of a traffic ticket. If the Commisioner starts punishing for misdemeanors he is going to have a very hard time drawing the line anywhere.

3. Bigger fish to fry - with the Burress and Lynch issues, Goodell is going to have a hard time suspending Marshall unless he outright bans those two. It's hard to equate gun charges with a shouting match with the fiance.

4. Star Caps - the Commissioner has historically been able to act as judge, jury and executioner because the league has always acted as if his disciplinary actions were beyond judicial review. However, last December a Minnesota judge handed down an injunction against the suspension of several players in the Star Caps incident. The injuction was upheld in federal court. The players may, or may not, win. But Pandora's box has been opened; the courts are willing and able to review NFL disciplinary matters. I doubt if Goodell will want Marshall's case to become a test case for his disciplinary powers.

5. CBA Negotiations - When the owners opted out of the CBA last year, they didn't just opt out of the revenue sharing. They opted out of the whole thing including the Commissioner's disciplinary authority. The players are already not happy about some of Goodell's high handed ways. If he seems to be too arbitrary and capricious, the union may very well make his disciplinary authority a bargaining chip. If it comes down to $$ or his autrhority the owners may very well throw him under the bus. I doubt if he wants to turn this into a bargaining issue.

Again, I'm not saying whether what Marshall did (whatever that actually was) warrants a suspension, but I think he may avoid one anyway.

BTW: It has already cost him his contract extension. News is that the team will make him an RFA next year and see how things go.

Poll

What do you think the Commisioner will do? (not what he should/what he will)

Ignore the consequences and hand down a major suspension (4 games or more)

25 votes

Issue a token suspension just to show he's still in charge.

51 votes

Give Marshall a hand slap and stern talking to.

76 votes

Whitewash the whole thing; it's not worth it.

36 votes

188 votes | Poll has closed

Dan Wetzel calls out Mortenson

SlowWhiteGuy — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 16:30:25 -0000

This morning Dan Wetzel of Yahoo Sports calls out Chris Mortenson. While the article is written from the NE perspective he essentially accuses Mortenson of fabricating, or at least greatly stretching the truth, of the whole Cassel for Cutler trade.

When you couple this with rumors that Jay asked for a trade after Bates was fired and it starts to play out much differently. The more I read this the more it seems to play out like this:

1. Jay, upset over the firings of Shanny and Bates, shoots his mouth off about wanting to be traded.

2. Approaching FA teams in need of QBs start brainstorming about who might be available. Look Denver has a new coach and a QB who seems to be upset, they muse. Maybe they might be interested in trading Culter for the right price.

3. TB actually concocts a 3-way trade that might be plausible. Discussions are held, but Denver nixes the deal. (It had to be Denver. Why would NE accept a worse deal from KC and TB came up with it in the first place).

4. Word of the discussions leaks to the MSM who then engage in their typical distortions and contortions rathing than vetting the full story.

5. Cutler's agent, Bus Cook,seeing an opportunity to gain leverage, spins the story out of control (look at how many stories include quotes from him).

6. The Bronco's front office, realizing no good can come from futher discussions, make a statement to the DP, now the ONLY trustworthy local news source, then shut up.

7. Cook and the bloggo-sphere continue to whip the story out of proportion.

8. Hopefully well informed and reasoned fans realize that we have all been played by the MSM and Cook and forget the whole story and get on with our lives.

9. Cutler cools off (just like he did anfter Shanny's firing) and realizes that, even if he wants to get traded, the best way to max his paycheck is to put together a killer 2009 season.

10. The Broncos surprise the MSM by dominating the AFC West, including SD, enroute to a 10-6 season and a playoff birth. While they fall short of the SB, everyone realizes what this game is really about and resolves to come back even stronger in 2010.

OK, granted, the last two may be a stretch, even the last three. But the sooner we realize that we have been played, the sooner we can look at what really has been a very successful beginning to rebuilding this team.

Why the Asomugha deal is good for the Broncos

SlowWhiteGuy — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 01:14:49 -0000

With the departure of Dre Bly a lot of the Bronco faithful were hopeful that the Broncos might sign Nnamdi Asomugha. But the Raiders dashed their hopes by signing the CB to a record making deal. On further examination, I assert that the deal is actually beneficial to the Broncos.

Before describing why Asomugha's deal helps the Broncos I need to describe some assumptions that underly my assessment. The first assumption is that the Broncos will not be in the market for high-profile/high-priced free agents anytime soon. This is based on recent Broncos history coupled with NE's history since McD is a product of the Patriots system. I also think the Bowlen is looking at the Patriot and Steelers organizations as examples he wants to follow.

The second assumption is that the system that McD/Nolan/X will be implementing on defense is going to be based on highly versatile interchangeable players working in a team first system instead of building around a few stars.

Finally, while I expect the Broncos to use free agency to fill gaps on the team, I expect the focus to be on building through the draft.

So, why is the Asomugha deal good for the Broncos?

It hamstrings the Raiders and anything that's bad for the Raiders has to be good for the Broncos, not just out of spite, but also since we are division rivals. In addition, it is likely to force the Raiders to shed some players they might otherwise keep, making them available for the good guys (us). As I'm writing this I just noticed that Gabril Wilson has been released in a cost cutting move.
The Asomugha deal just made the cost of all the other high-profile free agents soar. With more money going to the high-profile free agents there will be less money available for the role player types I expect the Broncos to pursue since there is basically a semi-fixed amount of cap space to go around.
The Asomugha deal coupled with the tagging of Robinson just increased the value of Champ. I'm not a fan of trading Champ, but if the Broncos ever entertained the notion, his value just went up because there are two fewer "shut-down" corners on the market and his relative cost is a bargain.
The deal made it much more expensive for systems that emphasize cover-corners over system-corners. Since the Broncos are probably going to be one of the latter, like NE and Pitt this creates a comparative advantage for their system.
The deal just created serious cap implications for a lot of teams, not just the Raiders. This is especially true of cash-over-cap teams like Dallas and Washington. It could also have a ripple effect on team like the Chargers who have their own CB to worry about soon. This also creates another advantage to teams that favor a system approach versus a star approach, which I expect the Broncos to be.

Once the initial disappointment wears off it's actually kind of exciting.

Poignant Reminder

SlowWhiteGuy — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 22:58:13 -0000

Poignant Reminder

In all the Rah-rah it's easy to forget what sports is really about. This isn't a Broncos story, or even about football, but it's nice to know that some coaches know what really matters.