Before discussing the zone blitz it is necessary to briefly discuss the idea of blitzing.  I consider a blitz to be any defensive play when the defense sends five or more defenders against the quarterback.  Just like any type of football defense a blitz can either be classified as a man or zone blitz.  In man coverage the defenders are responsible for covering a particular receiver in zone coverage the defenders are responsible for a certain area of the field.

The offense can have a maximum of five eligible receivers and will also have one quarterback and five offensive linemen.  A man defense needs to be able to account for each one of these receivers by assigning at least one defender to each receiver.  If a receiver stays in to block the defender responsible for him can either drop into coverage or blitz the quarterback.  Therefore the in a man blitz the defense can always blitz one more defender than the offense can account for.  This is because the offense cannot have the quarterback both block and throw.  Below is an image from Madden 10 showing this concept:

via www.mymaddenpad.com

Notice that six defenders are assigned to blitz and the other five in man.  No matter how many men the offense keeps in to block the defense will be able to send one more after the quarterback.  For example if the offense blocks the fullback (Y) the defense will just blitz the free safety (who is matched up with him in man).

There is a major problem with this defense even it does send a free defender, as the great Dick LeBeau (defensive coordinator of the Pittsburgh Steelers) said, "if one [defender] slips or if [the offense] springs a guy somewhere, there’s no one left as a second line of defense to keep a 15-yard gain from becoming a 60-yard gain."

Here is a video of Colt McCoy throwing a touchdown against a man blitz being run by Ohio State in the Fiesta Bowl: (Chris Brown of Smart Football diagrams the offensive play here http://smartfootball.com/passing/colt-mccoys-texas-passing-game)

Now even with the major risk associated with a man defense blitz defenses still want to be able to blitz the quarterback.  The solution is the zone blitz.  Dom Capers (defensive coordinator of the Green Bay Packers) said the zone blitz is "a way to put pressure on the quarterback and yet not have as much risk involved as if you’re locked up with a man. It’s not as defined for the quarterback to read because you’re passing receivers [from defender to defender], as opposed to being clearly locked up on a receiver. We think it gives us some ability to create confusion and indecision on the part of a quarterback."

For zone defenses to be able to adequately defend the field they must have at least six defenders in zone coverage, but for a defense to be counted as a blitz five or more defenders must rush the quarterback.  This makes the numbers pretty simple for the defense.  Five defenders will rush the quarterback and six will drop back into zone.  The complicated part is where the defenders blitz, where the defenders drop into zones, and which defenders do which.

To understand the zone coverages behind a zone blitz it is first necessary to understand zone coverages.  For the purpose of this article I will only explain two zone coverages (I will write a piece in the future that goes far more in depth with the different kinds of zone defenses) the two-deep and three-deep zone shells.

In the two-deep zone defense there are two defenders who defend the deep portion of the field; typically this is done by the two safeties.  These defenders split the deep portion of the field into halves; each player is then responsible for one half of the field.  The other four or five defenders in zone coverage (in this case it will be four defenders) split the shallow areas into fourths or fifths; each defender is then responsible for a fourth or a fifth of the shallow part of the field.  Below is a diagram of a two-deep zone defense with seven defenders in coverage:

via espn.go.com

In the three-deep zone defense there are three defenders who defend the deep portion of the field; typically this is done by the free safety and the two cornerbacks.  These defenders split the deep portion of the field into thirds; each player is then responsible for one third of the field.  The other three or four defenders in zone coverage (in this case it will be four defenders) split the shallow areas into thirds or fourths; each defender is then responsible for a third or fourth of the shallow part of the field. Below is a diagram of a two-deep zone defense with seven defenders in coverage:

via espn.go.com

With all the presnap motion common to most zone defenses and the fact that the cornerbacks need to quickly drop into shallow zones it is hard for the defense to properly bump the receivers.  This means that a two-deep zone shell would leave to many voids downfield for the receivers to run into.  Most zone blitzes end up coming out of a three-deep zone shell.  This is because as Dick LeBeau said "The zone blitz is a conservative way to blitz, really.  Percentage-wise, it’s the safer way to blitz. That’s what we were looking for all along when we started out."  More specifically in a three-deep zone blitz three defenders will split the field into thirds and three defenders will split the shallow part of the fields into thirds as well.   These type of zone blitzes are known as fire zone blitzes and are they type of zone blitzes run by the vast majority of teams.

via www.everydayshouldbesaturday.com

These zone blitzes do not usually look like zone defenses while being run by the defense.  The defenders who are covering the shallow thirds of the field do not just guard an area of the field.  Instead they read the patterns being run by the receivers, this is called "pattern reading" and is something that Nick Saban, head coach at the University of Alabama, is famous for.  This makes it appear as if the defenders are playing the receivers in man coverage.  Further, if the corners are dropping back into deep coverage (at least one cornerback is always dropping into deep coverage because these are three-deep zones) they are taught "press-bail" technique.  This means the cornerbacks line up over the receivers as if they were going to play bump-and-run coverage and then drop into deep coverage.

However, simply assigning five defenders to rush the quarterback and assigning another six defenders to drop back into zone does not ensure a successful zone blitz.  There are two more aspects present in most successful zone blitz schemes.

First, a defender must drop into zone where another defender is blitzing from.  In the diagram below the free safety "drops down" this means he is initially given a deep alignment, but immediately before or after the snap he "drops down" into the front seven to cover a shallow zone.  In this case the free safety is covering the shallow zone right behind the blitzing weakside and middle linebackers.  If this were not done (dropping a defender into coverage behind the defenders) the quarterback would know there would always be a hole in the coverage right behind the blitzers (a defender cannot both blitz and drop into zone).

via espn.go.com

Secondly, a defender (usually a defensive lineman) will pretend to blitz and then drop back into coverage.  This is done for two reasons to occupy an offensive lineman or other player assigned to pass protection for the offense and to confuse the quarterback.  The defender will often take one step towards the quarterback and then drop back into coverage.

This first step by the defender forces an offensive lineman (or any other blocker) to commit to blocking this defender.  However, when the defender drops back into coverage the offensive lineman is left "blocking air" and is wasted for the play.  This is essential for obtaining the numbers advantage that is essential in football.  Remember the defense is only blitzing five defenders, so if there was no confusion among the offense they could easily block the blitz with their five offensive linemen while still sending out five receivers.  If a defender can force an offensive lineman to "block air" than the defense is rushing five defenders against only four blockers (assuming that the offense is not blocking any backs or tightends) and has a numbers advantage.  In the imagine below notice number 72, Stapleton an offensive lineman for the Steelers is blocking nobody while Ray Lewis closes in on Ben Roethlisburger for the sack.

via assets.sbnation.com

The defender who is pretending to blitz not only confuses the blockers, but also the quarterback.  As I mentioned above most quarterbacks are taught that if they read a zone defense pre-snap the area where the blitzers are coming from will be open.  This is because a defender cannot both blitz and drop into coverage.  The quarterback will then see a blitzing end or linebacker and assume that area of the field will be open only to throw the ball right into the defenders hands when they drop into coverage.  This explains how you can see things like this:

via cache2.asset-cache.net

Now that I have explained the basics behind a zone blitz I will walk you through a few of them.

The first is the middle and weakside linebacker cross blitz that is diagrammed above.  Here is the play diagram again:

via espn.go.com

This blitz shows all of the main parts of the zone blitz we have discussed above.  First, this blitz is a fire zone blitz as there is three-deep zone shell with three defenders in shallow zones.  Second, we can see the free safety "dropping down" behind the blitzing linebackers.  Third, we see the weakside defensive end fake blitzing and dropping into coverage, which forces the left tackle to "block air". 

We also see something common to most zone blitzes which is the crossing of the linebackers blitzing angles and the stunting of the defensive linemen.  This is meant to further break down the same pass protection just like the fake blitzing of the weakside defensive end.  The defensive linemen are blitzing the outside shoulders of the offensive linemen they are aligned over; this should force the linemen to turn at angle to block the defensive linemen.  Making the offensive linemen turn creates bigger gaps for the linebackers to rush through.  The crossing of the linebackers accomplishes the same thing right guard will turn to block one linebacker creating a very clear lane for the other linebacker straight towards the quarterback.  Below is video of the Green Bay Packers running this play against Minnesota Vikings: (the play is actually flipped in the video, so it is middle and strongside linebacker blitz)

The next blitz is middle linebacker nickleback blitz.  This blitz is done out of a nickel package (meaning there are five defensive backs, three corner and two safeties).  Below is the same blitz diagrammed with the strongside linebacker blitzing instead of the nickleback.

via www.everydayshouldbesaturday.com

This blitz shows a perfect example of a safety "dropping down" notice how at about -2:20 the nickleback slides in towards the offensive line and the safety drops down over the slot receiver.  This does three things, it allows the safety to more easily cover his shallow zone, the nickleback has shorter to run while blitzing the quarterback, and the defense appears as if it could still be a man coverage base defense.  Notice the weakside defensive end dropping into coverage and the defensive lineman stunting towards the weakside.  Here is the video:

That’s about it for zone blitzes hope you learned something.

"Over the years, young coaches who want to get their teams to throw the football have written to me to ask about the best way to get started. My professional advice never includes my personal secret - knowing the single wing."

-Lavell Edwards BYU Head Coach 1972-2000

via static.nfl.com

Last season the Miami Dolphins began to run a formation called the Wildcat.  While many announcers and seeming many NFL coaches were very confused the Wildcat is based off the single wing offense, an offense almost as old as the game of American Football itself.

Continue reading this post »

Running Concepts

Just like with the passing concepts in the NFL the running concepts themselves are fairly limited in number.  That is not to say that all the running plays in the NFL are the same, instead just a few concepts are hidden throughout a wide amount of formations and personnel groupings.

To understand my descriptions of the running concepts it is first necessary to understanding the gap lettering along the offensive line.  The gaps are lettered as follows:  the gaps between the center and the guards are the A gaps, the gaps between the guards and the tackles are the B gaps, and the gaps between the tackles and the tight ends are the C gaps.  Below is a diagram:

via 2.bp.blogspot.com

I will begin with the basic Inside and Outside Zone runs, and then cover the Power run play, the counter run play, and the draw.  In a separate and shorter post I will cover the Wildcat (this post should come sometime before Friday afternoon.

Continue reading this post »

An Introduction to the NFL Passing Game:

Every Sunday we see quarterbacks throw passes for hundreds of yards.  However, for the typical fan the passing game is magical event.  The quarterback drops back to pass and the ball magically appears in the receivers hands.  In these articles I hope to be able to better explain how the passing game works.

I will start off by explaining passing concepts.  Passing concepts are how the routes that the wide receivers run are classified.  While NFL coaches are known for having playbooks that are thousands of pages long all of the vast majority passing plays can really be broken down into less than twenty passing concepts.  Now before dismissing this claim keep in mind that each passing play can contain multiple passing plays and that the way these plays are run in the game is meant to confuse even NFL defensive coordinators.  Below is a description of these passing concepts as I can best tell.  Now keep in mind that I am not a coach or player at any level, just a college student who loves the game of football.

Continue reading this post »

When people think of the Denver Broncos they often think of an Offensive Line where, "that would let my grandmother run for 1,000 yards."  This year the Denver Broncos have proven that your grandmother most definitely could not run for 1,000 yards.

In this article I will attempt to show three things:

1.)    The state of the Denver Broncos’ running game in comparison with the rest of the league.

2.)    The state of the Denver Broncos’ running backs in comparison with the rest of the league.

3.)    The effect of the Denver Broncos’ running game on their overall performance.

This article is hopefully the first in a series of articles examining the Denver Broncos Offensive and Defensive Lines. 

via cache.daylife.com

Continue reading this post »

Hello all, this is my first “entry” at The Mile High Report and I hope to bring a different perspective to this wonderful community of fans.   As a Broncos fan I was not very happy with the way the season went last year.  Like most of you reading this I watched every Broncos game and consider myself a pretty knowledgeable person about football, so I ended the season with some pretty firm ideas on why the Broncos failed last season.  I placed the blame mainly on our offensive and defensively lines, specifically in the red zone for the offensive line and in run defense for our defensive line.

Since then I have stumbled upon an excellent football statistics website which I urge you all to explore, www.footballoutsiders.com.  Using the statistics provided by this website I have began to reexamine the Broncos last season and this is what I found.

Continue reading this post »

What the Broncos will do this offseason and why:

Now we as Broncos fans all have our own opinions on what the Broncos should do, but often what they actually do is something completely different.  So, I will take a moment to take off my orange shaded glasses and put on someone else's, the Shannahan Brain Trust.

I intend to use two main sources Ted Sundquist's Draft Blog (http://blog.denverbroncos.com/tedsundquist/2007/11/20/i-feel-a-draft-in-here/)and Shannahan's postseason press conference (Andrew Mason's transcript, on his blog http://blog.denverbroncos.com/mason/2008/01/10/live-from-shanahans-season-wrap/#more-682).  I will also be using scouting reports of various college players and will site my information accordingly.  Lastly, I will have to guess a little, but I will try to keep this to a minimum.

First, I will start with what kind of players I think the Broncos will go after, and then give the specific players I believe fit these profiles.  I will only look at positions that I feel the Broncos organization believes are needs in the second section.

Offense:

While I believe the Broncos have some serious needs on offense (just see my previous two diaries) I don't believe the Broncos believe the same.

Shannahan in his postseason press conference said:

 "I saw us getting better.  Even though we didn't play as well as we'd like to play consistently, I think there's a big future there."

"You always have the personnel to win 10-plus games.  We've got to get a little healthier.  We've never lost 62 (games) for guys on offense."

To me this says that Shannahan thinks the Broncos have all the necessary pieces.  Shannahan seems to believe that the Bronco's offense just needs some more experience, and fewer injuries.

QB:

I believe almost all Bronco fans believe Cutler is the real deal, and so does Shannahan, here are his thoughts:

"Strong arm, a guy that'll compete ... Now he's got to go out there and do it, just like John (Elway) did ... John had to prove himself in a playoff situation and finally got to that Super Bowl ... His first four years all you heard was that he never played in a bowl game and that he never won a playoff game ... But he believed in himself and kept on working his rear end off and finally got to the promised land ... I was in the same situation with Steve Young, following Joe Montana."

However, like most all our other offensive positions he believes we need more experience:
"There's a million things (Cutler) can work on -- ball position, consistency with his short throws, blitzes and how to react to them, footwork, pressure, stepping up, scrambling.  Different things that all quarterbacks go through."

RB:

On Travis Henry, I believe Shannahan will keep him with a restructured contract.  This is mainly based off two quotes, first "Any time there's a setback with a guy you have to look back at what he did in the first four or five games...You kind of get out of football shape ... He tried, but he could never get back in shape."  This quote seems to imply Henry got unlucky and that without injuries Shannahan felt he could have been a strong back.  In Henry's first five games he average 6.0, 4.9, 3.2, 5.0, and 4.1 yards a carry with 139, 128, 35, 131, and 61 yards a game.   I believe it is safe to assume if he had stayed uninjured he would have had quite the season, or at least that is what the first five games show, and Shannahan therefore says he will look at.

The second quote is Henry's, "I want to make it right to the Broncos, the fans and myself," Henry said. "I want to be a Bronco and make it all right. I don't want to be anywhere else. I owe those people something for all that happened last year. I want to clear my name there. I'm so hungry to do right there." This says that Henry really realizes how much he owes to Shannahan, Henry is most likely going to redo his contract.  These quotes would seem to suggest we will not go after a high profile RB (through the draft or FA).

Something to consider though is the average life span of the Broncos running backs in Shannahan's span as head coach.  This year was suppose to be Henry, last year was suppose to be Tatum Bell, the year before Mike Anderson, and so on.  This suggests we will get a low profile RB like we do every year, however I believe we will keep all of our current RBs as well, regardless to how illogical this may seem.

However, when talking about Young, Shannahan seems to feel the way most Bronco fans do, he can't handle ""20-25 carries" 16 games in a row, but that for 15-20 carries he can get five yards a carry , Shannahan expressed a similar sentiment with Andre Hall.  Both dealt with injuries this year."  This quote says that Shannahan would like to keep Hall and Young to back up another back (most likely Henry as suggested above).

TE/FB:

These two are related to me for this team, because I believe as we see more two TE sets, as we did at the end of the season we will see less of the FB.  Graham was one of, if not the best, blockers on our team towards the end of the season.  Graham also is, I believe, the highest paid TE in the league, therefore he will get playing time.  As for Sheffler, Cutler is taking him and Marshall to go train before the season suggesting their already good chemistry will only get better.  Our star QB would also not take a TE on a training trip if he didn't think he would get his touches.  Therefore, I believe we will run multiple two TE sets as we did towards the end of the year and neither position is much of a need.

When one looks at the catches our TEs pulled in during the season there is no discernable pattern with Graham.  The most catches he ever had this season in a single game was four and he only average 1.71 catches and 17.6 yards a game.  However, Sheffler's receptions went up steadily over the course of the season.  In his 12 games he averaged 4.1 catches a game (this includes both weeks 13 and 16 when he only had 3 total catches) , more than double Graham, and he averaged 45.8 yards a game.   These statistics support the idea our FB will get less and less playing time between the 20s.

WR:

The first question anyone has about the Broncos WR situation is Javon Walker.  I think the Broncos will do everything in their power to keep him, and if not they will trade him.  In his postseason press conference Shannahan had nothing but good things to say about Walker, he said "Guys like him, I will talk to before March 1."  Ted Sundquist said that in reference to Lelie that "Lelie's absence takes nothing away from our current WR unit with the likes of Javon Walker, Brandon Marshall and Brandon Stokley."  In reference to whether we would cut or trade him, Mr. Sundquist when referring to former Bronco George Foster and his situation said, "The emergence of Erik Pears as a step-in for the injured Matt Lepsis in `06 gave us an option to deal George for another player of need (DC Dre' Bly). With the money invested in Lepsis and the quality of play we received from Pears (along with his emerging upside), it became apparent that we wouldn't resign Foster for what it would require in `08. Why not get something of value rather than eventually let him go through free agency?".  This seems to suggest they really don't want to cut Walker, but with the emergence of young players like Marshall and Sheffler they might trade him.

Marshall really emerged as a top WR in the N.F.L. last season, and his production didn't seem to suffer at all when Walker was on the field.  Some people are suggesting that we need another dominant WR to keep top CBs off Marshall, but I disagree and I believe Shannahan does as well.  The Broncos in no point in Shannahan's career have had two "dominant" WRs.  Marshall did well against #1 CBs almost all season.  Instead if the Broncos pursue a WR he will be more in the mold of Lelie or Nash ( I know neither really worked out, but you get the idea).

OL:

While I think this is a pressing need I feel the front office disagrees.  Right after his retirement Matt Lepsis said, ""I was really impressed by Ryan Harris and the veterans are coming back, and Chris Myers and Chris Kuper did a good job. They'll be fine."  I believe Shannhan places the poor play of the OL this past season almost solely on the decline in play of Lepsis and the injuries of Nalen and Hamilton.  This is 3/5 of our OL so this is a reasonable assumption.

I will add defense and my predictions later this week.  Feel free to make any comments or suggestions.

First my thoughts to HoosierTeacher's in defense of post on offense being a bigger need than defense .

"DT - Rookie Thomas looked good when he finaly got a shot.  But he isn't domineering, and he needs help either way.  I think he is a future great at the position, but we need two DTs now.  Why?  Because we need at least three to four for rotation (include Thomas and McKinley).  We can debate on if Thomas is ready to start or not.  We need a bare minimum of 1, but really 2 DTs.  McKinley (like Thomas) is, in my opinion, solid as a rotational DT, but not a strong starter."

I agree we need one more good DT, but I don't think he needs to be great.  What I think we disagree on his how high of a draft pick, or how high of a salary this player will warrant.  I don't think anyone would disagree we need one even two DTs.  I just disagree on where we get them.  I think we simply need a big DT next to Thomas, what Sam Adams should have been when in shape.  I think Frank Okam from Texas in the second would work well.  However, if Patt Simms drops I would draft him over Okam, or if we trade back (as I want to)  I would like to take him late in the first.

"OLB - Wherever you think Williams should play (OLB or MLB), we need two more guys.  Winborn got signed to an extension, so he might be considered a project (perhaps for special teams).  But Gold and Webster did not perform well this year (and I say this as a big Gold fan).  Like DT, we need a bare minimum of one, but really need two."

I think Williams should stay in the middle.  Honestly, I would like Wilson on the strong-side, but I doubt that will happen.   I really think we only need one starting caliber OLB (Boss Bailey, or a 4th round pick).  I think it the poor performance of our OLBs can be improved through coaching and a better DL.  They were struggling with gap control and tackling, both coachable mistakes, the question is do we have the staff to fix that.  However, above all they were having to shed blocks to get to the ball carrier most every down, something that really shouldn't happen to all the LBs every play.  The OL is not supposed to easily get to the secondary.  So, I really think our LBs poor play had more to do with coachable mistakes and a poor DL, therefore they are not as big of a need as most say.

"SAF - Lynch may return, but his two neck injuries and the fact that he is slowing with age at the very least makes his value debatable.  He is good in zone near the line of scrimmage, but he can't cover a fast TE as well as he should, and his speed won't improve if he is needed in deep zone.  Hamza looks like a good fit for SAF.  Whether Lynch leaves, or stays to play a short yardage role, we really need a coverage safety."

I couldn't agree more.  However, from what I understand we will be running more of a 4-4 4-6 defense next year, similar to what we ran the second half of the year.  This would mean, assuming we don't bring in a safety, that Hamza Abdullah is deep, and Lynch is in the box.  This would allow him to do what he does best, tackle and read plays, and his speed would be less of a factor.  We cold simply run a 4-6 defense with nickel personnel, on passing downs, allowing us to put Foxworth at WLB, manning him up with the TE.  I don't believe Safety is as big a need as OT, WR (if Javon leaves), DT, just to name a few.

"So our biggest disagreement is on the OL.  First let me say that I agree with Styg's comment above that Pears is the real deal.  I think you sold Pears a little short, but I won't eleborate beyond Styg's comment.
Harris has been getting positive press from the coaching staff.  The word is that he has learned the scheme quicker than normal, and the staff is eager to get him on the field (this was well before Lepsis announced retirement).
I thought Nalen would retire, but it looks like he wants to stay another year.  He was on IR this year, and is an injury risk in my opinion.  But he still plays very well.  For Hamilton, read my comments about Nalen.  I advocate two OL pick-ups for depth in case of injury or to develop for '09 and beyond.  I think Hamilton is a serious injury risk; Nalen very much less so."

This is where the disagreement really comes form, I pretty much agree with HoosierTeacher on numbers of players needed for each side of the ball, it is simply priority that we disagree on.  I think in similar way to how we leapt at the opportunity to draft a franchise QB in Cutler, we should jump at the opportunity to get a franchise Tackle.

"5. I also agree with some of the commentors above, that we are already getting gashed by the run.  Our offense can't win games if opposing teams can control the clock.  We must fix our run defense."

I believe our abysmal run defense is a product of a few major components not related to personnel.  
First, it is chicken vs. egg whether the offense not being on the field causes the run defense to suffer, or whether the run defense keeps the offense of the field.  I really think both deserve some attention.  The idea that the offense getting off the field to quickly hurts the run defense does not apply to the Broncos of last season due to the large amounts of yards the offense compiled.  As far as staying on the field our offense was good if not great (just look at Cutler's third down percentage).  However, our offense could not score.  This meant the opposing offense would run the ball a lot, therefore leading to more broken tackles and longer runs as the game went on.  Opposing offense could run a lot because they almost never were playing from behind, and they need to rest their defense.  Now for the run defense keeping the offense off the field.  The Broncos were actually in the very strange position where teams could run so easily that they really weren't burning to much clock. Teams would just quickly march down the field when they could run.

"6. Also don't forget that the depth we build on defense has a direct correllation to our special teams personnel.  That's an area we need help in too."

I agree, however players that are taken to start on the defense often don't start on defense.  Therefore I don't see that as an argument for defense being a bigger need.
As for the great teams being great on both sides of the ball, well I disagree.  I believe they are great on one side of the ball and that makes the other side look much better than it really is.  They do have talent on defense don't get me wrong, they just have far more on offense.  I agree Sanders is a great player, just Manning is better.  I believe we have almost have the personnel to have a good defense, we just need the offense to step up.

I intend to write another diary that is more my own thoughts later tonight.

Why offense is a bigger priority than defense
I firmly believe that offense is a far bigger need for this team than defense.   This is for a few major reasons, the N.F.L. is an offense oriented league; the Broncos have a better core of players on defense than offense, and this team's strength lies in offense (I am not contradicting myself, I mean in coaching and talent evaluation, which are more long lasting than personnel).

It is pretty the well known that the N.F.L. is an offense oriented league.  Just  look at how ridiculous the pass interference penalties and roughing the QB penalties are.  To truly show that these penalties have such a large effect on the makeup of teams simply watch the playoffs.  The four teams left the Giants, Patriots, Packers, and Chargers are all known (at this point in time) as offensive teams.  Those teams with good defenses that even made it to the playoffs lost early.  The Jaguars, Titans, and Steelers, all lost because of the inability of their offenses to put up enough points, and the fact that their defenses could not make the critical stop.  Every time the Patriots have looked like they are going to lose it is their offense that pulled them through, with a game winning drive.  It is quite obvious the dominant teams in the league are those with great offenses and decent defenses.

Those teams with great offense also make their defenses look better than they are.  A perfect example would be the Patriots, every team feels like they have to pass the ball to beat the Patriots, and this puts the Patriots defense in a perfect position, they don't have to worry about fast HBs and TEs exposing their defense's slow LBs and safeties.  They know what teams are going to do and can dictate the game with complicated blitzes.  Further, teams like the Colts who have a reliably good offense have an easier time at putting together a good defense.   The Colts put together one of the NFLs best defenses with only two star players (I don't consider Mathis a star).   This is because they knew they only had to look for role players.  Whereas defenses like the Ravens and Panthers that have no offense to lean on have to really on many multi-talented defenders.

As for having a better core of players on defense, I always read/hear people say that the Broncos have a great young "nucleus" of players on offense with Sheffler, Marshall, and Cutler.  I would have to disagree, I don't think those players are bad by any means, but they all play skill positions.  The nucleus of any offense or defense is made up in the trenches not by skill players.  Manning's receivers may have been injured, but it was the injury of Tony Ugough that truly hurt that team.

Even if the skill players are considered to make a nucleus, I would rather have Williams, Lynch, Bly, and Bailey than Marshall, Sheffler, Graham, and Cutler.  Bailey is on average (he had an off year due to a change in scheme), the best CB in the league, Bly is a top 15 corner, Lynch is a top 10 safety, and Williams was second in the AFC in tackles.  Marshall is a top 10 Wide Receiver, Sheffler is a top 15 TE, Graham is a great blocking TE, but until the Broncos improve our OL he is nothing more than an OT, and Cutler is a top 15 QB.  The Broncos simply have more talent on defense.

I believe our OL is far worse than our DL.  I believe our DL simply needs one more DT, and some time.

At DL the Broncos currently have three-four good and improving defensive ends.  It often takes two-three years for defensive ends to develop, so there is no need to get more defensive ends as the Broncos have two rookie defensive ends, and a great second year pass rusher specialist.

As for the tackle position, I believe given the time Thomas could develop into a good DT, however he most definitely needs time.  At the second DT spot the Broncos need another DT, it is quite possible after cuts the Broncos won't have more than two DTs on the roster (McKinely, Thomas, Mallard is a DE technically right?).  Hothe Broncosver, I don't think the Broncos need a great DT to line up opposite of Thomas.  Instead the Broncos just need a serviceable DT.  If one looks around the league they realize that very few teams have more than one good DT, in fact only Jacksonville and Minnesota come to mind.  Further, those teams with the "big, space eating, run-stopping" DT that everyone wants can be found on the following teams; Detroit, Carolina, Baltimore, and Tennessee (I excluded Jacksonville and Minnesota because I already addressed them).  Something should jump out at you, none of these teams made the playoffs except Tennessee, and Tennessee did not look like a playoff team.  I believe the Broncos would be fine with a second maybe third round Defensive Tackle, and some depth.  This can be achieved through FA and a draft pick or two.
Now the Broncos look at our OL, I firmly believe that our OL is in far more trouble than our DL.  Unlike the DL there is no position that I can say the Broncos don't need help with, maybe the Broncos have right guard settled, maybe.  Also, unlike the DL those teams that are truly dominant have good OLs, Brady and Peyton would never have the years they have without their OL.  Now, let's look at the OL player by player.

Nalen is our next to ancient center.  He says he will be coming back after his messy bicep injury (his muscle was literally disconnected from the bone).  Hothe Broncosver, the Broncos have to wonder how much he has left.  I mean his play has been declining as it is, I think he will have a year like Lepsis had this year.  His only value will be as a veteran presence.  In fact I am extremely surprised he is returning.

Hamilton is a big question mark for me.  Truly I thought he was done with football period.  He will probably be the best player on our OL, or he could be inactive and call it quits.  However, Shanahan loves him and if Hamilton can play he will start.  If he does come back and plays for the Broncos he will fix the center spot. Yet, he is simply too big of a question mark to count on.

Myers played decently at center, however, if one looks at styg50's post "NPLB End of Season Report: Holding the Lines" it is quite clear the Broncos need some work on the interior of the OL.  As most all 3rd and 4th short runs are from between the Tackles, a place the Broncos particularly struggled.  This really can be placed on Myers shoulders in my mind.

I think the Broncos will be fine at center next year, not great, but fine.  The Broncos should draft a late round center and work on developing him over the next two-three years.   Even if Hamilton comes back to play center he is pretty old, and as I said before that injury really worries me.

Kuper and Holland, played decently, but the Broncos really struggled in the interior running game.  These two players seem pretty similar to me, they are both bigger than the typical Denver OL and a little slower.  I think Kuper has more potential than Holland, and Holland is just a temporary replacement.  I think that with time Kuper will develop into a good guard, and that Holland will be fine.  In a ZBS scheme the guards really need to play together a lot, something our OL has missed for years, I think other than depth guard is fine.

I really hope the Broncos draft maybe a guard, or sign a decent guard from FA.  As long as the Broncos don't sign Faneca I will be fine.

Tackle is where I am really worried.  We did well running off tackle this year, but in my opinion that was due more to the Bronco's guards and Graham than the Bronco's Tackles.

I am not to sure about Ryan Harris, but since the team invested a third round draft pick in him I believe he deserves a chance to start.  I think Pears is nothing more than a backup.  My preferred solution for Tackle would be to draft a LT in the first (Oher would be my favorite, his potential is amazing, and he could spend almost his entire career with Cutler) and put Harris at RT.  The only problem with this is that Shananhan never starts first year players and I think his ego is too big to draft a OL in the first (especially with the Foster incident).  So, I think it is more likely we putt Harris at LT, draft a Guard and maybe a Center, and pick up Gordan Gross in the FA market.

Now after, coming close to the end of this I have had a few realizations.  We really need OL help, probably need another WR, and need a HB.  However, I believe Shanahan will draft a DT in the first and address our other needs with later round draft picks.

I don't believe we will draft a RB because of Shanahan's comments about "thinking of a players first few games" when evaluating a player with an injury.   This is clearly talking about Henry, and to me is a sign we look to keep Henry.  I think a healthy Henry, Selvin Young, and Andre Hall is fine.  I just don't think it will happen.

As for WR, I really hope we keep Javon, but if we don't we need to draft a WR who can spread the defense, and has good hands.  I am all in favor of the WR from Vanderbilt.

Well, that is it for now.

This is my first "diary", so let me know what you think.