Mike knows offense, but....

[zoony]

The bad news is, we have the Team we deserve. We are the 2006 Broncos.

The good news is, defense doesn't much matter in this league anymore. I say "doesn't much"... but it does to some degree. This defense is closer than we think.

The game has changed. The era of assembling defenses with 4 HOFers playing key positions and stonewalling their way to a championship are gone. Can it happen? Sure, but we're talking incredible strokes of luck. The Teams that make the playoffs and win championships are Teams with dynamic offenses and opportunistic defenses that are capable of creating turnovers and a few good stops each quarter. We're still a few players away on D, but I don't think we're as far as some would make us out to be. One or two more defensive stops Sunday, we would have beat the Giants.

Redskins fans need to get this image of the 2000 Ravens out of their head. It's just not going to happen in today's NFL. Offenses are too good, defensive players are too scarce.

[SkinsFTW]

Our run defense is not bad at all though. (it currently stands as 7th best, in terms of yards given up per game.)

But yea... this secondary is one of the worst of all time..

I doubt our run defense is that great though. When every team we face has their most productive passing game of the year when they play us then why even run the ball?

Someone else said that we are losing the time of possession battle because other teams are trying to keep the ball away from RG3, well they are doing it with the passing game. Usually you run the ball to do that but they don't need to. Even though we have the #1 run offense and top 3 in takeaways with a 70% completion rate, we don't dominate TOP or even break even a lot of times. That is truely pathetic.

[SWFLSkins]

The bad news is, we have the Team we deserve. We are the 2006 Broncos.

The good news is, defense doesn't much matter in this league anymore. I say "doesn't much"... but it does to some degree. This defense is closer than we think.

The game has changed. The era of assembling defenses with 4 HOFers playing key positions and stonewalling their way to a championship are gone. Can it happen? Sure, but we're talking incredible strokes of luck. The Teams that make the playoffs and win championships are Teams with dynamic offenses and opportunistic defenses that are capable of creating turnovers and a few good stops each quarter. We're still a few players away on D, but I don't think we're as far as some would make us out to be. One or two more defensive stops Sunday, we would have beat the Giants.

Redskins fans need to get this image of the 2000 Ravens out of their head. It's just not going to happen in today's NFL. Offenses are too good, defensive players are too scarce.

The rules have change and some are not being used as much, like holding in the passing game. Contact down the field is almost like a hail mary anymore. But yeah you are right, the game has changed, and offense is key. I think the team is close, it is the DB that is killing us. Merriweather and Jackson should have been our starting safeties.

[Oldfan]

The bad news is, we have the Team we deserve. We are the 2006 Broncos.

The good news is, defense doesn't much matter in this league anymore. I say "doesn't much"... but it does to some degree. This defense is closer than we think.

Stopping an opponent from scoring seven points has always been equally important as scoring seven points -- and always will be.

Higher scoring games will not change the value of offense versus defense.

The game has changed. The era of assembling defenses with 4 HOFers playing key positions and stonewalling their way to a championship are gone. Can it happen? Sure, but we're talking incredible strokes of luck. The Teams that make the playoffs and win championships are Teams with dynamic offenses and opportunistic defenses that are capable of creating turnovers and a few good stops each quarter. We're still a few players away on D, but I don't think we're as far as some would make us out to be. One or two more defensive stops Sunday, we would have beat the Giants.

If you are saying that parity rules in the NFL, I agree. I agree that it's unlikely to put together a super-talented defense, but I will add that it's just as unlikely to put together a super-talented offense.

[SkinsFTW]

but I will add that it's just as unlikely to put together a super-talented offense.

But it used to be rare to see a guy like Elway or Montana lead the team on a scoring drive to steal a win late in the 4th quarter. Really, it was almost unbelievable when that happened.

Now it is expected and happens every week multiple times. Hell, Eli Manning himself does it 8 times a year it seems. Peyton Manning has brought teams back from 2-3 scores down in the 4th Quarter more than a few times too.

I've actually been thinking lately that the game winning drive stat that they keep track of would be better if it listed the QB's who failed to score on the final drive. It seems that any QB is expected to do it now.

Defenses just don't seem to stand a chance anymore. It's all about the QB's and that final 2-3 minutes of most games.

[Oldfan]

But it used to be rare to see a guy like Elway or Montana lead the team on a scoring drive to steal a win late in the 4th quarter. Really, it was almost unbelievable when that happened.

Now it is expected and happens every week multiple times. Hell, Eli Manning himself does it 8 times a year it seems. Peyton Manning has brought teams back from 2-3 scores down in the 4th Quarter more than a few times too.

I've actually been thinking lately that the game winning drive stat that they keep track of would be better if it listed the QB's who failed to score on the final drive. It seems that any QB is expected to do it now.

Defenses just don't seem to stand a chance anymore. It's all about the QB's and that final 2-3 minutes of most games.

In a higher scoring league, game winning drives will happen more often.

It isn't all about the QBs. Probability considered... over time, good offenses should get better results on all drives, including the final drive.

[maskedsuperstar]

I doubt our run defense is that great though. When every team we face has their most productive passing game of the year when they play us then why even run the ball?

Someone else said that we are losing the time of possession battle because other teams are trying to keep the ball away from RG3, well they are doing it with the passing game. Usually you run the ball to do that but they don't need to. Even though we have the #1 run offense and top 3 in takeaways with a 70% completion rate, we don't dominate TOP or even break even a lot of times. That is truely pathetic.

The Skins won the TOP battle Sunday. What killed the Skins were the turnovers. They were dominate over the Giants. Physically beat them up.

And the run defense? The Skins are 8th in the league. And lets be for real. Haslett likes to put pressure on the QB. He can't do that if the secondary can't cover. In any aggressive defense, the secondary must do its job. That's the issue.

[authentic]

I think the problem right now is he hired a neutered D coordinator. He wasn't even allowed to hire his own staff due to loyalty to people like Slowik and Burney. Playing musical chairs with Slowik is infuriating. The reports of Haslett running the cover zero because of Shanahan's influence if true are comical. Shanahan needs to swallow a little pride and hire a competent D Coordinator who has full control and is allowed to hire his own personnel and that is allowed to make tough roster decisions as well.

I agree with you 100%.. Also he needs to hire a coordinator who has experience in the scheme. I didn't mind the switch to the 3-4, but Haz is really a 4-3 coach, and from what i understand wanted to run the 4-3. Not that i think Haz is a top flight coordinator even under the 4-3, actually i think he sucks regardless. But i don't think he was put in the best position to succeed from the jump. And notice how the defense went to hell in a hand basket since Lou Spanos left in the offseason. Probably should have went ahead and made him the DC from day 1.

---------- Post added October-23rd-2012 at 09:02 AM ----------

The Skins won the TOP battle Sunday. What killed the Skins were the turnovers. They were dominate over the Giants. Physically beat them up.

And the run defense? The Skins are 8th in the league. And lets be for real. Haslett likes to put pressure on the QB. He can't do that if the secondary can't cover. In any aggressive defense, the secondary must do its job. That's the issue.

This loss wasn't totally on the defense, because of the 4 TOs on offense. But that game was a microcosm of the entire season, so far. We are able to effectively shut down the run, and generate atleast 2 TOs, yet we can't stop teams on 3rd down or marching down the field at the end of games. And the fact that nearly every week opposing teams are admitting that they were able to get big plays, based on tendancy and predictability of the Def playcalling, is inexcusable and really pisses me off!! :mad:

[Bang]

You both have the right idea, in my opinion. However, over his 16+ year career, for one reason or another, Shanny has either been unwilling or unable to land a grade A defensive coordinator.

Maybe it's because he's unwilling to delegate that much responsibility. Maybe he has been too quick to fire DCs in the past and that reputation is hard to shed. Maybe he just doesn't have a handle on the defense he wants. We can't tell what the problem is; but it isn't a problem that just began with Haslett. That much is clear.

Light of day calling...

Greg Robinson was the Broncos DC from 95 to 2000

the Broncos defensive rankings were

1995- 15th

1996 - 4th

1997-5th

1998 - 11th

1999 - 7th

2000- 24th

Nice run there. Top ten 3 times, and only dipping into the bottom half once.

In 2001 and 2002 Ray Rhodes had the job, and fielded the 8th and 6th ranked defenses in those years.

not too shabby..

in 2003 Larry Coyer took over.

Defensive rankings in his tenure..

2003- 4th

2004- 4th

2005- 15

2006 - 14

2007 - 19

Ahh,, now we're getting into this notion you have about how Mike never has good defensive coordinators and he doesn't care about his defense,, because this guy Coyer fits the bill... sort of.

his defenses definitely declined.. whether by his own doing or injuries or bad luck, I don't know. It tends to happen with coaches who stay in one place too long.. occasionally they go out on a low note. Most of the time, actually. Very few leave their job on their own. Such is the case with Mike. As i said earlier in the thread,, familiarity breeds contempt.

In Mike's final year his DC was Bob Slowik, and the Broncos notched their worst (by far) ranking in Mike's tenure..29th. He's currently on our staff as linebacker coach.

So, as it would appear when we actually look at these things that the Broncos have had respected football coaches occupying the DC spot for most of Mike's career, and they finished accordingly ..7 times in the top ten..(4 in the top 5), 6 times below 10th. (twice below 20, and only 3 out of 13 seasons finishing in the lower 50% of the league. 3 out of 13. By definition, that's ten seasons of better than average defense.

So, by using facts and research we have learned that the Broncos defense was actually pretty damn good over almost the entire 13 years.

And so we come to Jim Haslett..He and Coyer and Slowik are the only ones who fit your characterization.

Haslett's defenses have been decidedly mediocre, average finishing position about 18th. In fact his best finish was last year, at 3rd.

But the fact is this.

In a 16 yr coaching career, he's had exactly 6 years with 2 defensive coordinators who MIGHT fit this notion of Mike unwilling or unable to find good DCs... (I'm not ready to fit Haslett into this compartment yet. His defense is now bad, but when it was healthy last year it was not. This year injuries and other factors have definitely put a dampener on what he's able to do on the field.)

My MAIN criticism of Mike's tenure in denver is that he was also GM, and I think that is too much a conflict of interest for a coach. This could easily cause perhaps some blindness, or ignorance, take your pick.

I think it may play more into your idea in that by doing both jobs he focused more on his offense.. since that is his area and human nature would tend to move his mind in that direction.

I'm only speculating, but it's indeed possible.

~Bang

[Oldfan]

Light of day calling...

Greg Robinson was the Broncos DC from 95 to 2000

the Broncos defensive rankings were

1995- 15th

1996 - 4th

1997-5th

1998 - 11th

1999 - 7th

2000- 24th

Nice run there. Top ten 3 times, and only dipping into the bottom half once.

In 2001 and 2002 Ray Rhodes had the job, and fielded the 8th and 6th ranked defenses in those years.

not too shabby..

in 2003 Larry Coyer took over.

Defensive rankings in his tenure..

2003- 4th

2004- 4th

2005- 15

2006 - 14

2007 - 19

Ahh,, now we're getting into this notion you have about how Mike never has good defensive coordinators and he doesn't care about his defense,, because this guy Coyer fits the bill... sort of.

his defenses definitely declined.. whether by his own doing or injuries or bad luck, I don't know. It tends to happen with coaches who stay in one place too long.. occasionally they go out on a low note. Most of the time, actually. Very few leave their job on their own. Such is the case with Mike. As i said earlier in the thread,, familiarity breeds contempt.

In Mike's final year his DC was Bob Slowik, and the Broncos notched their worst (by far) ranking in Mike's tenure..29th. He's currently on our staff as linebacker coach.

So, as it would appear when we actually look at these things that the Broncos have had respected football coaches occupying the DC spot for most of Mike's career, and they finished accordingly ..7 times in the top ten..(4 in the top 5), 6 times below 10th. (twice below 20, and only 3 out of 13 seasons finishing in the lower 50% of the league. 3 out of 13. By definition, that's ten seasons of better than average defense.

So, by using facts and research we have learned that the Broncos defense was actually pretty damn good over almost the entire 13 years.

And so we come to Jim Haslett..He and Coyer and Slowik are the only ones who fit your characterization.

Haslett's defenses have been decidedly mediocre, average finishing position about 18th. In fact his best finish was last year, at 3rd.

But the fact is this.

In a 16 yr coaching career, he's had exactly 6 years with 2 defensive coordinators who MIGHT fit this notion of Mike unwilling or unable to find good DCs... (I'm not ready to fit Haslett into this compartment yet. His defense is now bad, but when it was healthy last year it was not. This year injuries and other factors have definitely put a dampener on what he's able to do on the field.)

My MAIN criticism of Mike's tenure in denver is that he was also GM, and I think that is too much a conflict of interest for a coach. This could easily cause perhaps some blindness, or ignorance, take your pick.

I think it may play more into your idea in that by doing both jobs he focused more on his offense.. since that is his area and human nature would tend to move his mind in that direction.

I'm only speculating, but it's indeed possible.

~Bang

Since those rankings you list are very different than mine, I suspect you are using the NFL ranking based on yardage. I consider them useless. The DVOA rankings done by Football Outsiders require far more effort to produce. They examine each play within the context of the game situation. Giving up six yards on third and five with the game in doubt has far more value in the ranking than giving up six yards on third and 12 when holding a two-score lead in the fourth quarter, for example.

Greg Robinson averages an 11 ranking on your list. He drops to 14 on mine.

Ray Rhodes averages an 18 on the DVOA ranking for his two years. You didn't give his rankings. You simply excluded him.

You excluded Jim Bates 2007 whose unit ranked 21 in DVOA.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teameff2012

BTW I never said that Mike didn't care about his defense. I said that, for whatever reason, he wasn't nearly as good at it as he is at the offense.

[Morneblade]

Light of day calling...

~Bang

Didnt want to quote the full text (got a warning about that some time ago) but it was a good post. I think it does shed some light that the OP isnt as valid as some think. However you could say that Shanahan has started to lean (for whatever reason) toward guys that are not effective. I'd love to get a good DC in here though, and let him pick his coaches. Morris is more of a 4-3 guy (which I would not mind going back to personally) but do we really want to try and transform the Defense again? Or do we try and get a top flight DC here? Regardless, I think that Haslett should not be here at years end.

---------- Post added October-23rd-2012 at 11:10 AM ----------

Since those rankings you list are very different than mine, I suspect you are using the NFL ranking based on yardage. I consider them useless. The DVOA rankings done by Football Outsiders require far more effort to produce. They examine each play within the context of the game situation. Giving up six yards on third and five with the game in doubt has far more value in the ranking than giving up six yards on third and 12 when holding a two-score lead in the fourth quarter, for example.

Greg Robinson averages an 11 ranking on your list. He drops to 14 on mine.

Ray Rhodes averages an 18 on the DVOA ranking for his two years. You didn't give his rankings. You simply excluded him.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teameff2012

Rhodes was 6th and 8th on his list OF

[pjfootballer]

Carriker and Orakpo I'll give you.

Meriweather is garbage. So are the rest of our safeties. Even 100% healthy (and with Jackson not suspended) our secondary is awful.

How do you know Merriweather is garbage? He hasn't played yet. He did fine in NE, then regressed in the Chicago "tampa 2" defense. I'd like to give him a few games besides preseason to determine if he's garbage in our scheme.

---------- Post added October-23rd-2012 at 11:16 AM ----------

74 years young!

Close! Haha.

[Oldfan]

... Rhodes was 6th and 8th on his list OF

Missed that; but the OP is perfectly valid unless you think that the NFL yardage stats are more accurate than the DVOA.

[DarrellsMyHero28]

How do you know Merriweather is garbage? He hasn't played yet. He did fine in NE, then regressed in the Chicago "tampa 2" defense. I'd like to give him a few games besides preseason to determine if he's garbage in our scheme

I'm not sure he was 'fine' as he was cut by a team that still needed major secondary help.

Not to mention the numerous off the field issues...

[Darkstarr]

As I see it, the firing of Shanahan was justified if the owner wanted championships. With full control, Mike had given him one playoff win 1999 - 2008. The hiring of McDaniel was a mistake.

But he remains the ony man who has given Bowlen Championships.

[Oldfan]

But he remains the ony man who has given Bowlen Championships.

That's a true but deceptive statement if the topic is whether or not the Denver firing was justified -- and that was the topic.

[pjfootballer]

I'm not sure he was 'fine' as he was cut by a team that still needed major secondary help.

Not to mention the numerous off the field issues...

Ok, I'll say he had 1 great year in NE, then regressed under Belichick. Sophomore slump, but Bill expects perfection, so you have to be the right kind of player in his systems.

[DarrellsMyHero28]

Ok, I'll say he had 1 great year in NE, then regressed under Belichick. Sophomore slump, plut Bill expects perfection, so you have to be the right kind of player in his systems.

Fair enough, but when I watch the Pats pass defense (which is almost as bad as ours) it doesn't inspire much confidence in a guy that they cut.

[Bang]

But he remains the ony man who has given Bowlen Championships.

I always believe there should be an asterisk here.

Like

Mike shanahan*

*Inherited possibly the greatest quarterback in history.

It helps, eh?

~Bang

[Bang]

Since those rankings you list are very different than mine, I suspect you are using the NFL ranking based on yardage. I consider them useless..

You have a tendency to do this when it doesn't agree with your premise.

the rankings are less of my point than the names, although the rankings show their success.

Of his four DCs.. 2 of them are considred by pretty much everyone in football to have been top notch guys. (Rhodes and Robinson).. what their numbers would be isn't known when th hire is made, and at the time of the hire, I'm sure the broncos thought they were hiring two top guys.. whch by their repuation, they were.

Coyer, i admit I don't know much about, and it looks to me like this guy Slowik had no business in the position he got. His previous stints as a DC were less than stellar.

i didn't exclude Bates, Bates was moved to "assistant head coach; defense", and Slowik was DC as the season began. What each's duties were, I don't know. Slowik is listed as their DC for 07.

All of these assistant head coaches that sprung up in the last 7 or 8 yrs,, hard to say what they do. Coaching staffs seem to have doubled in size in the last 15 years. Hell, when Gibbs came back we seemingly had a coach for every player, and half of them were "assistant head coaches" in one way or another.

(Personally, I think it's a way to keep people from being hired away. NFL rules say that you can court a coach with a lateral or upward move. By making so many of them 'assistant head coaches", you can eliminate a lot of that.)

I note you didn't say Mike doesn't care about the defense, but you have intimated before that you believe Mike's ego can get in the way of his decisions.. and I am perhaps reading some of that into this discussion.

~Bang

[SirClintonPortis]

You mean like doing things such as drafting two QBs?!? I'm still bitter about that pick, when the team still had so many other needs.

4th round picks rarely pay dividends in their first year, and it's even a further longshot that they become Pro Bowl level starters.

[pjfootballer]

You have a tendency to do this when it doesn't agree with your premise.

the rankings are less of my point than the names, although the rankings show their success.

~Bang

And nobody but fans on message boards and Pro Football outsiders use DVOA and advanced metrics. When you watch a game and they say Washington has the 18th ranked defense and 32nd against the pass, they aren't using DVOA or advanced metrics. Fans on this message board want to constantly use them when they don't agree with the rankings that the NFL uses, I guess.

[KCClybun]

I always believe there should be an asterisk here.

Like

Mike shanahan*

*Inherited possibly the greatest quarterback in history.

It helps, eh?

~Bang

Yeah, he had maybe the best quarterback ever, but having maybe the best quarterback ever lost Denver all those other Super Bowls.

Mike Shanahan finally built a team around Elway that didn't require Elway to have to make the superhuman effort to elevate a bunch of bums to the highest stage. I think Mike deserves as much credit for those wins as Elway because of the team he built around maybe the best quarterback of all times and adjusting his offense to suit Elway's skillset.

[Bang]

Yeah, he had maybe the best quarterback ever, but having maybe the best quarterback ever lost Denver all those other Super Bowls.

Mike Shanahan finally built a team around Elway that didn't require Elway to have to make the superhuman effort to elevate a bunch of bums to the highest stage. I think Mike deserves as much credit for those wins as Elway because of the team he built around maybe the best quarterback of all times and adjusting his offense to suit Elway's skillset.

This is true,, but those losses were not on Elway.

Back then the AFC and the Broncos especially were using much smaller defensive linemen and were working speed to get results.

When they ran into the Giants and Redskins and 49ers, they just flat got beat off the ball and shoved backwards. Badly.

In the old layman's terms,, finesse vs brute force.

Elway just couldn't keep up.

~Bang

[Oldfan]

You have a tendency to do this when it doesn't agree with your premise.

I'd like to get along with you but it isn't going to happen unless you stop this argumentative BS.

the rankings are less of my point than the names.

Then why did you use them and claim your research was enlightening?

Of his four DCs.. 2 of them are considred by pretty much everyone in football to have been top notch guys. (Rhodes and Robinson)..

Mike didn't hire Robinson in 1995. He didn't have control of the Broncos until 1999. Mike hired Rhodes then he and Rhodes clashed and Rhodes resigned.

i didn't exclude Bates, Bates was moved to "assistant head coach; defense", and Slowik was DC as the season began. What each's duties were, I don't know. Slowik is listed as their DC for 07.

The 2007 Broncos began the season with Jim Bates' defensive scheme. Mike scuttled that after five games.

I note you didn't say Mike doesn't care about the defense, but you have intimated before that you believe Mike's ego can get in the way of his decisions.. and I am perhaps reading some of that into this discussion.

Of course his ego is a factor in his decision making. It's a problem for us all; and Mike demonstrates a higher than average problem. It could well be an underlying factor here.