November 7, 2007 12:15 AM
Rumblings after the rout
Tony Juarez leads it off with a little matchup talk . . .
Q: When was the last time the Broncos were an underdog to the Lions? I don’t ever recall them being an underdog (against Detroit) in the last 30 years. Also (before Sunday) when was the last time the Broncos lost to the Lions?
A: Though it gets more ink and broadcast time than almost anything throughout any NFL season, I have never put much stock in the whole underdog deal.
Players talk about it all the time as if the betting line has anything to do with who anybody thinks is actually going to win the game. The line is set by the oddsmakers to simply split the money bet down the middle.
That way the sports books make out just fine no matter who wins the game. They don't care who wins, they just set the point spread to whatever it takes to split the betting down the middle.
If one team gets too much of the money bet, the line moves to force things the other way.
In terms of the Detroit-Denver matchup, they've now played only 10 times, including Sunday, and the Lions' last victory before Sunday's rout was in 1990 when they defeated the Broncos 40-27.
Denver still holds a 6-4 edge in the all-time series with the last Broncos win coming in 1999.
Jason Hoskins in Ottawa, Ontario, took a look at the schedule in recent weeks . . .
Q: One thing I haven't noticed too many people talking about is the quality of the opponents that Denver has faced this season . . . There are still a few tough games on the schedule (four more against teams with winning records), but it looks like things soften up a little bit. Is there a chance that the Broncos record is more a result of the quality of whom they've played rather than who they are?
A: Toss the 6-2 Lions into the mix, and the Broncos' five losses have come against teams that are currently 29-11, for a winning percentage of .725.
That is indeed stout, but the Broncos also have lost three of those games by at least 18 points, two by at least 37 points and four by at least nine points. So, they have not played the league's top-shelf teams close.
The Broncos just aren't just losing to those teams, they are often getting manhandled. It would show more if they had played more of those games more closely even if they had turned out to be losses.
What the big margins show is that the Broncos, so far this season, have been a team that doesn't respond all that well to bad things happening to it. Usually that means youth or a team that makes a lot of mistakes.
The Broncos have a little of both working there. They can fix mistakes, but they have not played nearly as cleanly as they have in recent years.
They will be far more penalized, for example, this season than last when they had the fewest penalties in the league.
In their wins, all on the right foot of Jason Elam, they have defeated three teams that are a combined 12-12 (.500) and the 6-2 Steelers are the only team the Broncos have defeated that has a winning record at the moment.
So the schedule may be a little easier the rest of the way, but the Broncos also play the majority of those games on the road and as Sunday showed, that isn't always a fun proposition.
Mitch Boehm looks into the backfield . . .
Q: What is the story with Mike Bell? He has been inactive for the majority of the games played this year. Has he not shown anything in practice to warrant a spot on the active roster each week? Last year he made a niche for himself by scoring from the 1-yard line by leaping over the pile like Walter Payton used to do. With all the Broncos (troubles) in the red zone, why wouldn't they activate him instead of Andre Hall? I thought Mike proved his worth last year.
A: He did indeed, but after the starters, special teams will always break the ties when the team decides on the 45 players who will be active for any game.
Andre Hall has a significant special teams role now as the team's kickoff returner, and the Broncos like his work there so far. Bell was also moved to fullback in training camp, and he finds himself behind a player at that position who plays a ton on special teams – Paul Smith – and the team's starting fullback in Cecil Sapp.
Bell was moved to fullback, in large part, because the Broncos also like Selvin Young better – they believe Young is quicker to the hole and is a better receiver out of the backfield – in the backup role behind Travis Henry.
So, while Mike Shanahan routinely piled the praise on Bell in training camp last season – at one point he said Bell was doing things in practice that the team hadn't seen since Terrell Davis – the roster changes affected Bell's status this offseason almost more than any other player who made the roster coming out of this year's training camp.
And when they move you to fullback, they aren't saying they like your future as a runner. So he's in a tough spot, and it will be difficult for him to carve out playing time right now unless there is some kind of injury in the backfield.
In the interest of full disclosure, John Grauberger in Normal, Ill., had a nay vote on a portion of my midseason report . . .
Q: I don't follow the ball on most plays, whether I'm watching on TV or in person. I usually watch the lines. The defensive woes here are too numerous to count. But I have one major bone to pick with you: Matt Lepsis as the first-half MVP? This guy gets such a free ride in Denver, and I have yet to determine why. Idiot fans who believe only what they read actually think he's an elite left tackle. He is nobody's MVP. Watch him -- he's beaten by speed, he's beaten by power and cannot pass protect. His man is always loose or has pushed him back into the quarterback's lap. And in the run game, he is an absolute zero who can't even cut people effectively anymore. I just don't get it. The line as a whole is weak -- and was with (Ben) Hamilton and (Tom) Nalen in the lineup, as well. These red zone issues aren't new this year. To line your franchise quarterback up behind this "bodyguard" is ridiculous.
A: What I wrote was that given the circumstances this year that pro personnel people around the league believe without Lepsis playing the way he is right now, the Broncos' offensive problems would go to the next level of struggle.
I think coming off knee surgery a year ago for a torn ACL that Lepsis has not only played through some pain but played pretty well.
I have broken down each game on video – several times – and Lepsis has graded out well overall. Perfect? No. But a high quality year thus far. The Broncos have played with two tight ends in the formation much of the time this year to try to balance out the defensive formation and give their tackles some help.
But Lepsis has handled his business in one-on-one situations pretty well. He has always handled the speed guys better, because of his footwork, than the rush ends who have some power moves.
Opposing defensive coordinators say they would prefer to attack Broncos right tackle Erik Pears as well as the middle of the Broncos offensive line.
The Lions really rushed hard in the middle of the field and had the Broncos in trouble up front most of the day Sunday.
Aaron Talbot is looking for change . . .
Q: The end of this '07 season will mark Mike Shanahan's ninth year without (John) Elway. In those nine years, Shanahan has won one -- count 'em, one --- playoff game. Perhaps out of respect, we should give him one entire decade without No. 7 to prove himself. But, if after the '08 season, Shanahan still has just that one playoff win post-Elway, then it will be best for Shanahan and the team for him to move along . . .Winning multiple Super Bowls as a head coach is definitely largely about skill. The other large factor is timing. Noll had timing with (Terry) Bradshaw, Steel Curtain, etc. . .; Bill Walsh with Joe Montana, etc. . .; Jimmy Johnson with Troy Aikman, Emmitt Smith, etc. . .; Shanahan with Elway, Terrell Davis, etc. . . For Shanahan to come back next year and win a Super Bowl would mark a 10-year lag between Super Bowl wins. This would be an unprecedented feat by some four years. Without Gary Kubiak as his offensive coordinator, Shanahan is a mediocre .500 at 12-12. My early favorite to replace Shanahan is Kubiak.
A: Aaron also wanted to bring Elway back into the organization in a football role and speculated about tension between Elway and Shanahan as a reason Elway doesn't work for the team now.
I don't know anyone in the organization who believes there is any tension between Elway and Shanahan. Elway doesn't coach for the same reason most former players who are financially secure don't coach – he has plenty of other things to do without working all of the hours coaches do for most of the calendar year.
Not many Hall of Fame quarterbacks are looking to enter coaching these days because they can make a tidy living in television or in any of the other vast assortment of businesses that want to bring them in.
As far as Shanahan without Elway I can only say: Welcome to the big club.
The historical rundown:
Chuck Noll's Super Bowl wins without Terry Bradshaw? Zero. He didn't do quite as well with Mark Malone, Bubby Brister or Cliff Stoudt behind center. And in comparison he coached the Steelers 12 seasons following his fourth Super Bowl win – with Bradshaw for all four -- and won just two playoff games in those 12 years.
Vince Lombardi's championships without Bart Starr? Zero.
Paul Brown without Otto Graham? Zero.
Jimmy Johnson without Troy Aikman? Zero.
George Seifert without Joe Montana or Steve Young? Zero.
Bill Walsh without Montana? Zero.
Mike Holmgren without Brett Favre? Zero.
Tom Landry without Roger Staubach? Zero.
Bill Belichick before he had Tom Brady? Got fired.
Brady was a sixth-round pick, certainly a player the Patriots didn't draft with the idea he would be one of the best big-game passers in the history of pro football; otherwise, they wouldn't have waited until the sixth round to take him.
Interesting to consider what the Patriots run might look like had Mo Lewis not knocked Drew Bledsoe out of the lineup and forced Brady in during the 2001 season. Because the Patriots – with Belichick coaching – had a choice to make in training camp in '01 about who was the best player to start at quarterback and they picked Bledsoe.
In short the relationship between top-level coach and franchise quarterback is a longstanding one.
Were those Hall of Fame coaches suddenly bad coaches when they didn't have a Hall of Fame-worthy quarterback? No. But they didn't always have a franchise quarterback because franchise quarterbacks are hard to find. Some franchises never see the wait end between one and another.
Some never even get one. So, those who have them are fortunate and often are rewarded for the fruits of those labors only when they have them.
The Broncos may not have another Hall of Famer behind center for quite some time. Winning a championship without one is more the exception to the rule, especially for franchises with multiple wins.
The Steelers have five Super Bowl wins. Four came with a Hall of Famer at quarterback. The 49ers have five, and all five came with a Hall of Famer at quarterback. The Cowboys have five, and all five came with a Hall of Famer taking the snaps.
In short, Shanahan is in a crowded boat. He believes Jay Cutler has the potential to be a championship quarterback, so his challenge now is to build a team around Cutler to make it happen.
He also works for an owner in Pat Bowlen who believes Shanahan is the best person for the job. Whether anybody else agrees doesn't matter much because Bowlen has the vote that counts.
And he just gave Shanahan an extension before the season started.
So criticize the draft record, the recent losses, the one playoff win since Elway's retirement? But it would be wrong to say most coaches who have won multiple Super Bowls haven't suffered the same fate when their quarterback called it a career.
Again, Joe Gibbs is the exception, not the rule.
William Christensen, a regular, looked at the roster . . .
Q: Now that we can officially label this year's version of defense offensive, I'm curious what future personnel changes you foresee the Broncos making to get their defense back to where it was when it was a top-five unit. I'd suggest acquiring help at safety, linebacker and additional line depth. On offense, a deep-threat wide receiver wouldn't hurt either.
A: The chief need on defense is still probably a top-end pass rusher, even with rookie Jarvis Moss expected to heal from a fractured lower leg for next season. The Broncos have not put enough pressure on the quarterback without blitzing since they let Bertrand Berry and Trevor Pryce leave in free agency.
They have simply not filled that void. They also need better play at defensive tackle as evidenced by the fact their best pass rusher at the moment – Elvis Dumervil – is getting plenty of extra attention right now because opposing offenses haven't been forced to double-team anyone else.
Like most teams that haven't been consistent on offense and defense, both lines always need attention. But that is almost a constant around the league.
It's hard to keep those units together in the free agency era, and that's why most long-time scouts believe line play on offense has suffered in recent years. It's also why more teams have gone to a West Coast, quick-hit passing game out of necessity because you don't have to protect the passer as long if the ball is out of there in three- and five-step drops.
A seven-step drops takes plenty of time to make it work. Some teams, with patchwork lines that have changed one or two faces each year, have a difficult time getting their quarterback that kind of time.
Safety will be a consideration as well, especially with John Lynch in his 14th season having missed time with a neck injury this year.
The Broncos will also take a hard look at strong-side linebackers as well. Linebackers are getting lighter all the time in college so that can be a difficult player to find these days, but they will have to take a look.
Bo Nostra wants a stat update . . .
Q: I'm confused on a statistic. Elvis Dumervil sacked Brett Favre (Oct. 29) after Favre fumbled . . . Dumervil is credited on the play by play but not individually. The Broncos are credited with a one sack in that game but no player. I saw him make the sack. Does this have to do with Favre fumbling then being tackled behind the line where it's a team sack. I'm kind of lost on it.
A: Odd play. Early in the fourth quarter of that game, Favre is in the shotgun in a spread look – an empty backfield so it's pass all the way.
He pump faked and the ball dropped out of his hand as he reset after the pump fake. The fact the ball fell straight down matters, and the fact Favre fell on the ball before Dumervil touched him down matters as well.
It was not scored a sack because Favre didn't fall down as he possessed the ball and then Dumervil tackled him. That would have been a sack. It would have been a sack if Dumervil had forced the fumble and then tackled Favre as Favre recovered the ball.
But Favre simply fell on a loose ball and was tackled. No sack. Play-by-play does say sack, but Dumervil was not credited with a sack in the final defensive statistics.
And finally Josh Adams in Ohio . . .
Q: I’ve been a loyal Bronco fan for as long as I can remember. I currently live in Ohio so I can only attend away games in the surrounding area. I did attend the Lions game over the weekend and although the result of the game was disappointing I was looking forward to the possibility of obtaining some autographs. Well, to put it nicely, the players weren’t open to the idea of signing any autographs. Only three players came out to see the friends and family while one player was downright rude. I’ve been to four games in the past two years, and I’ve experienced the same type of results for each. Does this post-game performance happen in Denver or is it only road games? I understand that the players might be down because of the loss, but you still need to say hello to the fans who go to the road games and support you and the team. Obviously, these players need to be reminded that they wouldn’t have a job if it wasn’t for us.
A: At most stadiums the players get on the buses at road games inside the stadium so they don't even mingle with fans unless the players come out into a common area because they have family members waiting for them.
Often they then consider that family time, and sometimes it's the only time they have to visit with family members who may have driven a long way to see the game before they themselves have to get on the bus for the airport. So some guys may be short with people when they shouldn't be.
And, no, some guys don't act the way they should or treat people in that case how they would want to be treated.
But the autograph landscape has changed in this age of eBay and memorabilia sales. At the scouting combine or the Pro Bowl or even at some Super Bowl functions, many professional autograph sellers pay a herd of kids to go up to players because they believe the chances are better athletes will sign for kids.
But the autographs are then going to be sold, and many players are troubled by that because the autograph was given with the idea it was a personal thing. As a result, some guys have taken to signing autographs only to someone specific, but the memorabilia guys also have solvents they wipe on the minihelmet, picture, etc… to get the name out and they then just sell it all anyway.
So that's the issue now. It's changed big time. Not a change for the better, certainly, but that's what the issue is most of the time.
That's it, and thanks.
November 7, 2007
10:13 PM
Christopher writes:
You got some info wrong in your first question. The last time the Broncos and lions played was 2003 when the Broncos won 20 to 16.
November 8, 2007
7:08 AM
Steve writes:
nice strong response to the shanahan-without-elway question. shanahan haters are crazy and spoiled -- there are very few franchises that have denver's stability and consistent success, which i credit to bowlen and shanahan.
November 8, 2007
3:13 PM
Joe writes:
He Leggy,
Is it true that Shannahan has Sundquist on Defcon 4 alert watching the Cleveland Brown waiver wire so that he can grab any player that Romeo decides to cut?
Seriously, instead of overhauling the defense and the coaching staff every two years, lets overhaul the scouting staff and get a GM in place that can overrule Shannahan. The Broncs have had too many poor drafts. Come on guys, you build the team via the draft and use FA to fill in the fringe, not the other way around.
November 9, 2007
8:35 AM
Ray Maderas writes:
Is Adrien Peterson everything Reggie Bush was projected to be and more?
November 9, 2007
8:40 AM
Ray Maderas writes:
Is Adrien Peterson everything Reggie Bush was projected to be and more? Even though others are having phenominal years...Tom Brady for one. Shouldn't he be considered for league MVP? It's amazing what he means to his team.
November 9, 2007
8:40 AM
Ray Maderas writes:
Is Adrien Peterson everything Reggie Bush was projected to be and more? Even though others are having phenominal years...Tom Brady for one. Shouldn't he be considered for league MVP? It's amazing what he means to his team.
November 9, 2007
1:06 PM
Brad writes:
Don't all you Shanahan haters just get steamed when good research and historical accuracy get in the way of your illogical "Fire the coach" crusade? It's a bad year, they happen, get behind your team anyway and look forward to better days with a good young core of players.
November 10, 2007
3:52 PM
Ken writes:
Jeff cites the Steelers' Chuck Noll's inability to win or even get to a Super Bowl without Terry Bradshaw as his QB and also mentions Don Shula's getting to only two Super Bowls in Miami(both of which he lost) after Bob Griese's retirement. Jeff fails to mention that in the late '80s and early '90s, a couple of coaches did win Super Bowls with multiple QBs. When he coached the Niners, George Seifert won Super Bowl 24(over the Broncos) with Hall of Famer Joe Montana at QB, and five years later, he won another Super Bowl, with Steve Young, also a Hall of Famer, quarterbacking. And Joe Gibbs won Super Bowls with three different QBs. He won Super Bowl 17 with Joe Theismann, Super Bowl 22(over the Broncos) with Doug Williams, and Super Bowl 26 with Mark Rypien. True, George inherited lots of talent from his former boss, Bill Walsh, who was a three time Super Bowl champion as a head coach. However, both George and Joe were careful to groom a successor to their champion QBs while the signal callers were still playing. That's something Mike didn't do, and Mike is still paying for it. True, Denver has lack of depth at other positions and a porous run defense and kick coverage game this year. And I think Jay is going to win a title in Denver eventually even though the Broncos are pretty much out of the picture right now. The Broncos, however, are paying a price for not preparing for John Elway's retirement, and I think Mike deserves criticism for not making the kinds of moves necessary to win a title.
November 10, 2007
3:52 PM
Ken writes:
Jeff cites the Steelers' Chuck Noll's inability to win or even get to a Super Bowl without Terry Bradshaw as his QB and also mentions Don Shula's getting to only two Super Bowls in Miami(both of which he lost) after Bob Griese's retirement. Jeff fails to mention that in the late '80s and early '90s, a couple of coaches did win Super Bowls with multiple QBs. When he coached the Niners, George Seifert won Super Bowl 24(over the Broncos) with Hall of Famer Joe Montana at QB, and five years later, he won another Super Bowl, with Steve Young, also a Hall of Famer, quarterbacking. And Joe Gibbs won Super Bowls with three different QBs. He won Super Bowl 17 with Joe Theismann, Super Bowl 22(over the Broncos) with Doug Williams, and Super Bowl 26 with Mark Rypien. True, George inherited lots of talent from his former boss, Bill Walsh, who was a three time Super Bowl champion as a head coach. However, both George and Joe were careful to groom a successor to their champion QBs while the signal callers were still playing. That's something Mike didn't do, and Mike is still paying for it. True, Denver has lack of depth at other positions and a porous run defense and kick coverage game this year. And I think Jay is going to win a title in Denver eventually even though the Broncos are pretty much out of the picture right now. The Broncos, however, are paying a price for not preparing for John Elway's retirement, and I think Mike deserves criticism for not making the kinds of moves necessary to win a title.
November 13, 2007
10:43 AM
PT writes:
You guys don't have to keep repeating yourselves. I heard you the first time.