After careful consideration I've concluded that John Fox knows more about football than I do.  I was expecting us to draft Marcel Dareus and maybe another defensive tackle or two.  To my dismay we got Von Miller and some other nice prospects but no defensive tackles.  Then I saw a table — can somebody tell me who posted it, so I can give credit? — suggesting that teams with dominant running attacks don't win nearly as consistently as teams with dominant passing attacks.  I suspect the obverse is also true, that if a team can only do one or the other it's better to have a dominant pass defense than a dominant run defense.  And with that thought I began to get a glimmer of what Fox has been up to.

Continue reading this post »

Now that the off-season is over we can start getting some of our questions answered. Heading into training camp a number of concerns are on my mind. None tops run defense. Ours was atrocious when it mattered most, at the end of the season and in the final game. I understand that the down linemen supposedly wore down and that the addition of Bannan, Williams and Green is supposed to fix that, but that's not the whole story. While having last year's starters as backups suggests the overall level of play will rise, that doesn't fully address the issue of why last year's run defense was outstanding early and wretched late. McDaniels has mentioned a number of times how badly last year's team reacted to defeat, suggesting that this was what caused losses to snowball into losing streaks. Perhaps part of what was missing on the line was veteran leadership. The offense had more reasons to decline yet fell off only modestly. It was the defense that just tanked. If young guys falling into a blue funk was part of the reason for the defense's precipitous decline, perhaps there's a second and more subtle reason for bringing in Bannan, Williams and Green. They'll be a steadying influence on the  young players and will help prevent a reoccurrence of last year's psychological meltdown.

Continue reading this post »

I just read a Woody Paige article, Elway back in Broncos' grace, which I notice Gr3yStreet has submitted as a FanShot. It's a feel-good read. John is golfing with Josh, John recently attended a mini-camp workout, John wants to be involved with the Broncos. It always puzzled me that John, the greatest Bronco ever, was so disinterested in getting involved with the team. It puzzled me that Rod Smith, one of the classiest acts ever, who bleeds for the  Broncos and is loyalty personified, was "too busy" to be involved. Now we see Smith tutoring Demaryius Thomas after previously trying to work with Marshall. Is McDaniels really as hard to get along with as reputed? Does he really drive away talented players? Or does he simply lack patience for guys whose brilliant me-first stats somehow don't translate into team wins? The quality free agents he's managed to attract suggest that good players do want to play for McDaniels, and it's equally clear that he's managed to make Bronco greats Elway and Smith feel wanted and valued.

Why were they so estranged? I can't speak for Smith but Paige's article suggests it was Shanahan who kept Elway at arm's length.

Elway said: "I told Mike I understood the relationship between head coach and player. My father (Jack) was a coach. I told him I wouldn't cross the line, but he made sure I didn't. . . . However, even after Shanahan and Elway won two Super Bowls (after losing three together) and John retired, the abyss widened, because Bowlen had shouted "this one's for John" after the first title, Shanahan didn't want Elway in an executive role, and if the coach won without Elway, that one would be for Shanahan."

Continue reading this post »

The following, culled from nfl.com, analyzes Kyle Orton's and Jay Cutler's stats for passes 1-10, 11-20,  21-30, and 31+ in a game, and their performance during the first, second, third and fourth quarters.  The desirability of such a comparison occurred to me while I was reviewing Orton's stats and discovered that he appears to be extraordinarily effective early on and then tails off.  I wondered why that was so and also how it differed from Cutler's pattern.  First, the stats themselves.  For each line I list the completion percent, yards per attempt, TD-INT ratio, first down percent and quarterback rating.

                              Comp%             Y/A             TD-INT          1st Down%        Rating

Orton

 1-10                       65.3                 7.3                7-1                  34.7                 99.8
11-20                      57.6                 5.8                3-3                  27.8                 72.7
21-30                      52.1                 6.2                6-8                  28.1                 60.2
31+                          56.0                 5.7                2-0                  30.6                 86.0

Cutler

 1-10                       64.4                 8.0                8-6                  40.6                 90.3
11-20                      66.2                 8.0                5-4                  38.1                 90.6
21-30                      59.2                 6.8                4-3                  30.6                 80.3
31+                          59.1                 6.4                8-5                  34.2                 82.0

Orton

1st quarter           70.5                  8.2                6-0                  38.9               116.1
2nd                         56.3                  5.8                5-3                  27.5                 76.2
3rd                          52.7                  5.8                5-5                  24.5                 66.5
4th                          57.1                  6.0                2-4                  31.2                 65.7

Cutler

1st quarter          65.7                   7.4                7-5                  39.9                 89.4
2nd                        62.3                   7.6                5-4                  34.9                 85.5
3rd                         61.9                   7.2                2-5                  34.4                 74.9
4th                         59.9                   7.3               11-4                 35.3                 94.2

Notice that Orton has a QB rating of 116.1 for the first quarter, 76.2 for the second quarter, then 66.5 and 65.7 for the third and fourth quarters.  The 116.1 is the number that jumped out at me and ultimately led to this mini-project.  It was totally unexpected.  Why was he so brilliant so early and so ordinary thereafter?  Further, notice that his rating for the first 10 passes is lower, meaning he was especially effective the first 6 or 7 passes (because on average he'd have thrown fewer than 10 passes per quarter).  I included Cutler to see how his pattern differed.  We know his overall numbers, except for red zone and last two minutes, are much better,  and we've already, in numerous threads, speculated about the extent to which having a better line, receivers and coaching, and a more pass-friendly offense, was a factor.  What I'm interested in here is how and why their numbers changed over the course of a typical game. 

On the face of it, especially in the breakdown by quarters, Orton tended to start strong and finish weak, with a drastic drop-off between the first and second quarters and a much smaller but still noticeable dip between the second and third.  Cutler, in contrast, was solid in the first half, had a noticeable dip in the third quarter, then bounced back for a strong fourth-quarter finish.  Was he better in crunchtime or was he playing catch-up against a prevent defense with the Broncos trailing by one or more TDs?  Did Orton start strong when playing for the lead and then play defensively and less effectively trying to protect that lead?  Was the coach's offensive play-calling, when the Bears were ahead, a factor in Orton's performance?

One reason I included both sets of stats, even though they cover much of the same ground, is that the analysis by passes rather than quarters reveals an interesting subpattern, namely that Orten tended to drop off after the first 10 passes, Cutler after the first 20.  Did Orton tire sooner than Cutler?  We've talked about arm strength but not arm endurance, how much a QB's passing performance falls off due to fatigue over the course of a game.  It could be argued that Cutler has so much excess strength that even when fatigued he throws a powerful ball when lesser QBs are reduced to wounded ducks.  But it's also possible that in addition to QB fatigue and coaching strategy, receiver performance over the course of the game is a factor.  How well-conditioned and disciplined were the Bears' receivers?  Did their performance deteriorate as the game went on?

I haven't offered as many answers as I usually do in an article.  Instead, I've highlighted an interesting anomaly and offered a sketchy preliminary analysis in hopes that others might join in and offer their own thoughts about the cause and significance of these differences.  Thanks to all who take the time to read and ponder this.

How did it get so far? Saying that McDaniels blundered, or that Cutler took McDaniels' willingness to entertain offers too personally, or that Cook had a game plan for which the Cassel incident supplied a handy pretext are not totally satisfying, although I've subscribed to each. I can even add another, call it the evil genius theory, in which McDaniels doesn't think Cutler is a winner but realizes that if he just puts him on the block teams will be wary. What does McDaniels know that we don't? Even if they bid they'll do so more cautiously and ultimately less generously. If, however, he subtly pushes Jay's buttons until Jay "forces" his way out of Denver, others will see not questions about his abilities but immaturity, which they think they can deal with. Hence his trade value will be maximized.

Continue reading this post »

Recent analyses of Cutler's 2008 season have been paradoxical, seeming to indicate both that he performed well under pressure and that he choked. On the one hand I recall someone mentioning that his third-down conversion percentage was 45 percent vs the league average of 37, and that he did relatively well in the fourth quarter. On the other hand Denver was one of the top scoring teams after three games but was something like 24th the rest of the way; and Jay's QB ratings for the last three games were 74.3, 72.4 and 74.9, respectively, when one big game might have been enough to get us into the playoffs. Can we resolve this paradox and arrive at a deeper understanding?

Continue reading this post »

Vindication is sweet. I've always felt that subtleties matter, that the "best" player in a game isn't necessarily the one with the gaudiest stats. Best in this context means the player who most enhances his team's chances of winning. I just got through reading an article, "The No-Stats All-Star", that brilliantly explicates this notion. The article is about a basketball player but it's relevant to football, to coaches and players, and to the upcoming draft.

Continue reading this post »

It's that time of year when a major concern of the coaches and of us, the fans, is judging college talent as a prelude to the draft. About nine months ago, just before last year's draft, I wrote a piece titled "Information Processing Speed". The impetus was my desire to understand why some can't-miss players, like Ryan Leaf, flame out and why some late-round nobodies, like Tom Brady, unexpectedly blossom at the next level. I suggested that a key factor was the upper limit of the speed with which a player is able to process information, to track who's where and what's happening in the pellmell chaos of a developing play and react decisively and fortuitously. What clued me in to the possible utility of such a category were the frequent remarks by players that what shocked them most when they turned pro was how fast things happen; and critiques of third or fourth-year quarterbacks who'd shown dramatic improvement that amounted to some version of, "The game has slowed down for him."

Continue reading this post »

A recent article on Josh Barrett, titled "Barrett seizes chance to shine for Broncos", along with D.J.'s impending return to his weakside linebacker spot, which Wesley Woodyard has been manning in spectacular fashion, has me thinking about next year's safety situation. I'm not the only one wondering where Woodyard will play in the coming weeks, given that all of us, including apparently Coach Shanahan, agree that he needs to play somewhere. But what about next year, when a more permanent solution can be developed? Can you imagine Woodyard, who has played the position before, and Barrett as our starting safeties?

An interesting sidenote in the article, which relates to something written by HT (or was it Styg or Guru?), is this comment from Barrett: "Barrett said he’s actually thankful he was on the practice squad for the first 11 weeks. That experience allowed him to absorb more knowledge. 'It’s been gradual, but the amount of information and the validity of that information that I’ve gotten, you can’t put a price to it,' he said." Since the point has been made in these pages that it was better for him to learn on the practice squad than being prematurely thrown to the wolves and perhaps losing confidence, someone needs to take a bow.

In the offchance that this does come to pass, that Barrett and Woodyard become (next year) our starting safeties, which position should each play? At first glance one would think Barrett, with his blazing speed, should be the free safety, but I think Woodyard's remarkable read and react skills--he appears to be far ahead of Barrett in that respect--make him the better candidate. What do the rest of you think?

Just got home from work a little while ago. When I left it was halftime with Denver trailing 20-10, and I hadn't heard anything in the interim. I was oh so tempted to crack open the paper I had picked up on the way home, to see how badly the Broncos lost. Instead, I resumed watching the game, cringing at the thought of what was to follow, wondering about my own masochism for putting myself through it. Then, after trading field goals, Royal's big play. Do they have a chance? No, don't get your hopes up. It'll only hurt worse. And then the turnover. The defense actually forced a turnover. Ohmigod! And the Broncos drive down and score again. And after Cleveland scores to retake the lead, the Broncos drive down and score again, thanks to an amazing fourth down effort from Hillis.

Some post-game impressions. One, it was so good to see the Broncos, led by some of their youngest, least experienced players, pick themselves up off the ground when all seemed lost, when the season seemed to be circling the drain. Two, some of the defenders need to have stenciled on their foreheads, "Just do your damned job." Early in the game I watched Winborn come crashing in from the left, trying to get in on the play, and losing contain as the runner went thataway. Later in the game I saw Ekuban do the same thing. Just do your damned job! Three, Hillis is the real deal. So is Woodyard. So is Spencer. We already know about Royal and Clady. Ryan Harris has been solid. Moss is beginning to show signs of life. Many other young plaers are showing promise. Our recent drafting has been brilliant and we are building the nucleus of a powerful football team.

Four, much of Cutler's recent struggles and interceptions appear to be due to miscommunications with his receivers, especially Marshall, and the fault is less Cutler's than Marshall's. But it has made Cutler hesitant and less effective. Let's hope they're back on the same page and Denver's offense is back on track. Five, the scenario I casually threw out before the game, Spencer at fullback blocking for Hillis at tailback, might be surprisingly effective and not just a stopgap. Finally, six, way to go Broncos! As always, Cleveland is good for what ails us.