Broncos Practice Updates? (1 Viewer)

[Raging Alpaca]

Any word on what practice has looked like with respect to these guys?

 

[Aaronstory]

Most NFL practices are closed after training camp.

 

[wannabee]

Even if Shanny came out and told us what the distribution of carries would be, which he will not, how many would believe him? Shanny has no reason to disclose anything prior to the game.

 

[Raging Alpaca]

Even if Shanny came out and told us what the distribution of carries would be, which he will not, how many would believe him? Shanny has no reason to disclose anything prior to the game.

Quite true. Just wondering if anyone had heard anything in terms of who was predominantly running with the first team, etc.

 

[BusMan]

Repeat after me: RBBC.

 

[Significant Shrinkage]

Exercise in logic here. Mike Bell was the STARTER for every preseason game, and did VERY WELL in all 4. Tatum Bell was carrying the ball in the 4TH QUARTER of the final preseason game. Does anyone think there's a chance that Tatum Bell starts in Week 1? What coach has their opening day starter taking carries in the 4th quarter of a meaningless game when everyone else in the league is resting their starters?

This doesn't qualify as an UPDATE, but for those who are obsessed with this situation, go ahead and relax. Mike will start week 1. Thereafter, it depends on performance (fumbling, blocking, YPC, etc), but at least in Week 1 I think you can start Mike w/ confidence. Frankly, I see a 65/35 split in most games, w/ some games being closer to 50/50. Ultimately, I see the following numbers for both:

Mike Bell - 1100 rushing yards, 10 total TD's

Tatum Bell - 900 rushing yards, 7 total TD's

 

[steaker]

But this is Shanny and all logic goes out the window........so Cedrick Cobbs could vault from #3 to #1 overnight...

 

[rascal]

Exercise in logic here. Mike Bell was the STARTER for every preseason game, and did VERY WELL in all 4. Tatum Bell was carrying the ball in the 4TH QUARTER of the final preseason game. Does anyone think there's a chance that Tatum Bell starts in Week 1? What coach has their opening day starter taking carries in the 4th quarter of a meaningless game when everyone else in the league is resting their starters?This doesn't qualify as an UPDATE, but for those who are obsessed with this situation, go ahead and relax. Mike will start week 1. Thereafter, it depends on performance (fumbling, blocking, YPC, etc), but at least in Week 1 I think you can start Mike w/ confidence. Frankly, I see a 65/35 split in most games, w/ some games being closer to 50/50. Ultimately, I see the following numbers for both:Mike Bell - 1100 rushing yards, 10 total TD'sTatum Bell - 900 rushing yards, 7 total TD's

Mike Bell carried in the fourth quarter as well. Try again.

 

[Significant Shrinkage]

Exercise in logic here. Mike Bell was the STARTER for every preseason game, and did VERY WELL in all 4. Tatum Bell was carrying the ball in the 4TH QUARTER of the final preseason game. Does anyone think there's a chance that Tatum Bell starts in Week 1? What coach has their opening day starter taking carries in the 4th quarter of a meaningless game when everyone else in the league is resting their starters?This doesn't qualify as an UPDATE, but for those who are obsessed with this situation, go ahead and relax. Mike will start week 1. Thereafter, it depends on performance (fumbling, blocking, YPC, etc), but at least in Week 1 I think you can start Mike w/ confidence. Frankly, I see a 65/35 split in most games, w/ some games being closer to 50/50. Ultimately, I see the following numbers for both:Mike Bell - 1100 rushing yards, 10 total TD'sTatum Bell - 900 rushing yards, 7 total TD's

Mike Bell carried in the fourth quarter as well. Try again.

Just noticed that both were carrying in the 4th quarter. D'oh!!!

 

[tick dog]

But this is Shanny and all logic goes out the window........so Cedrick Cobbs could vault from #3 to #1 overnight...

hope so, i snagged him as a total flier free agent just in case....rb's are thin this year, you never know, esp. with skeletor

 

[pinequick]

Repeat after me: RBBC.

True. Does "starter" in this situation even matter? Seems like one guy will happen to be on the field for the first offensive series, and then the rest will get mixed in at some point.I'm still betting on Bell (Mike) getting a bare majority of the touches, and the bulk of the goalline stuff--which makes him the most valuable Denver RB to have in my estimation.

 

[The Z Machine]

Repeat after me: RBBC.

True. Does "starter" in this situation even matter? Seems like one guy will happen to be on the field for the first offensive series, and then the rest will get mixed in at some point.I'm still betting on Bell (Mike) getting a bare majority of the touches, and the bulk of the goalline stuff--which makes him the most valuable Denver RB to have in my estimation.

which to me means that neither are terribly valuable. I have Tatum as my RB4, and hopefully I'll never have to play him. I'd much rather trade him than play him.

 

[phillzphan]

to everyone saying that this is a mess, you hope to never play him, etc. you're crazy. all of you.

look no further than 2 years back when Rueben Droughns was the #1. He got it after injuries. #### can happen. What happens to Tatum if MBell gets hurt? What happens to Cobbs if MBell gets hurt? And if MBell starts fumbling and making rookie mistakes?

Looks like worst case you're getting at least 1 1000 yrd rusher out of it. Maybe 2. Hell, a 6th round RB ran for 1500, 1700, 2000 yards from 96-98 starting in his 2nd year. 1st year he had 1100.

The upside is soooo huge that it has to be worth the risk. Some dude above has Tatum as #4 RB. If anything happens and Tater does get the start......hes a #1-2 RB.

That's hot.

 

[Gridiron King]

Cobbs will probably be the leading rusher for the Broncos this year when it's all said and done.

to everyone saying that this is a mess, you hope to never play him, etc. you're crazy. all of you. look no further than 2 years back when Rueben Droughns was the #1. He got it after injuries. #### can happen. What happens to Tatum if MBell gets hurt? What happens to Cobbs if MBell gets hurt? And if MBell starts fumbling and making rookie mistakes?Looks like worst case you're getting at least 1 1000 yrd rusher out of it. Maybe 2. Hell, a 6th round RB ran for 1500, 1700, 2000 yards from 96-98 starting in his 2nd year. 1st year he had 1100.The upside is soooo huge that it has to be worth the risk. Some dude above has Tatum as #4 RB. If anything happens and Tater does get the start......hes a #1-2 RB. That's hot.

 

[SSOG]

Repeat after me: RBBC.

True. Does "starter" in this situation even matter? Seems like one guy will happen to be on the field for the first offensive series, and then the rest will get mixed in at some point.I'm still betting on Bell (Mike) getting a bare majority of the touches, and the bulk of the goalline stuff--which makes him the most valuable Denver RB to have in my estimation.

which to me means that neither are terribly valuable. I have Tatum as my RB4, and hopefully I'll never have to play him. I'd much rather trade him than play him.

Were neither Mike Anderson or Tatum Bell terribly valuable last season, when they had the exact same carry breakdown? I mean, Mike Anderson finished as RB10 and Tatum Bell finished as RB22. I tend to think of both of those finishes as "valuable", but you never know, we might be talking about a 4 team league here.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Repeat after me: RBBC.

True. Does "starter" in this situation even matter? Seems like one guy will happen to be on the field for the first offensive series, and then the rest will get mixed in at some point.I'm still betting on Bell (Mike) getting a bare majority of the touches, and the bulk of the goalline stuff--which makes him the most valuable Denver RB to have in my estimation.

which to me means that neither are terribly valuable. I have Tatum as my RB4, and hopefully I'll never have to play him. I'd much rather trade him than play him.

Were neither Mike Anderson or Tatum Bell terribly valuable last season, when they had the exact same carry breakdown? I mean, Mike Anderson finished as RB10 and Tatum Bell finished as RB22. I tend to think of both of those finishes as "valuable", but you never know, we might be talking about a 4 team league here.

Hi ssog,I know you follow this closely. What's your take on how the carries will split up for the year in Denver?

J

 

[SigEp316]

Exercise in logic here. Mike Bell was the STARTER for every preseason game, and did VERY WELL in all 4. Tatum Bell was carrying the ball in the 4TH QUARTER of the final preseason game. Does anyone think there's a chance that Tatum Bell starts in Week 1? What coach has their opening day starter taking carries in the 4th quarter of a meaningless game when everyone else in the league is resting their starters?This doesn't qualify as an UPDATE, but for those who are obsessed with this situation, go ahead and relax. Mike will start week 1. Thereafter, it depends on performance (fumbling, blocking, YPC, etc), but at least in Week 1 I think you can start Mike w/ confidence. Frankly, I see a 65/35 split in most games, w/ some games being closer to 50/50. Ultimately, I see the following numbers for both:Mike Bell - 1100 rushing yards, 10 total TD'sTatum Bell - 900 rushing yards, 7 total TD's

Shanny played Mike Bell with the first team to make sure he was okay to cut Dayne. Tatum starts, Mike spells....Tatum = SOD1400 12 TD's

 

[moleculo]

From todays Rocky Mountain News:

Still, all signs point to a scenario with the former University of Arizona player leading the way, based on the team's preseason and training camp rotations and behind-the-scenes chatter the past several days.

That is, provided Mike Bell doesn't stumble in practices.

"I just really don't know at this time," coach Mike Shanahan said Wednesday. "I'm not trying to be coy."

...

"I don't think it's a risk, whoever goes in there," Broncos assistant head coach Mike Heimerdinger said. "We all have confidence in Mike Bell, and if he's the guy, it's a decision we'd all feel. He's shown he knows how to run. He finds holes, then he gets you the extra yards. He's shown he knows what to do."

...

One scenario that likely can be ruled out is using all three backs in a rotation. The Broncos tried that last season against the Kansas City Chiefs and found it difficult to get the players into rhythm.

The two Bells in practice this week apparently have rotated snaps, with Cobbs inserted on occasion. It's the same pecking order utilized during the preseason.

That hints strongly Cobbs will be cast in a wait-and-see mode until needed, much like Ron Dayne last season, with the other backs playing the lead.

 

[Nigel Tufnel]

From todays Rocky Mountain News:

The two Bells in practice this week apparently have rotated snaps, with Cobbs inserted on occasion. It's the same pecking order utilized during the preseason.

This is interesting. At least we're dealing with some facts here. It'll likely be one of the Bells.

 

[SSOG]

Hi ssog,

I know you follow this closely. What's your take on how the carries will split up for the year in Denver?

J

At this point, you all know as much as I do. Mike Shanahan says that the reason that he hasn't named a starter yet is because he honestly doesn't know who will start. He says a lot of it is going to come down to how well everyone practices this week.I normally don't like Dave Krieger (to put it mildly, I think he's a rumor-monger and a pot-stirrer of the highest order), but he wrote a nice article about the situation this week. I'll post the link and the entire article at the end of this post for those who are interested, but the gist of it is that Mike Shanahan really gains no advantage by not naming a starter this week, and unlike Bill Bellichick (who seems to think that pretending the injury report is a state secret will help him win games), Mike Shanahan *REALIZES* there's nothing to gain by not naming a starter. I mean, if Mike Bell is the starter, what does Shanny gain by not saying so? Does he not want St. Louis to be able to prepare for Mike Bell? How could St. Louis prepare for Mike Bell any differently- there's not any film on him yet!

No, there's just no advantage to be gained by not naming Mike Bell the starter. The only logical reason, then, why Shanny hasn't named a starter is because he genuinely hasn't decided yet.

Needless to say, this comes as a shock to me, since he was so certain when he promoted MBell and I haven't seen anything since then that would lead me to believe that there was a reason why Shanahan's certainty was shaken. The only thing I could possibly think of is this- historically, Shanahan has been VERY adverse to playing rookie RBs. Portis and Davis were the only two Denver RBs to actually WIN the starting job as rookies, and both were all-world talents. Portis took 4 weeks to win the job, and Davis opened the season as the starter, but really faced no quality competition for the job (most of the RBs on the roster were holdovers and not "Shanahan guys"). One of the reasons I was so high on Dayne is because I figured Shanahan would NEVER hand the keys to a rookie, especially an undrafted rookie like Mike Bell. I was definitely wrong there, but it's possible that Shanahan is still hesitating a bit now that the time is upon him.

Now, I'm no psychologist or historian or NFL scout, so the reality is this is probably me just talking out of the other end, but that's the one possible explanation I can think of- Shanny's just leery of handing the keys over to an unproven guy like MBell.

As for what will happen this week... I don't know how I can pretend to have a clue when Shanny himself has no clue, but I think Mike Bell still has to be considered the front runner for the job, and Tatum Bell seems pretty solidly locked in the #2 position (and if he moves anywhere, he's moving upwards). As a result (and without divulging too much info about the subscriber content), I agree with the FBGs decision to rank Tatum above Mike on this week's cheatsheet. I think Cobbs is the odd man out- he's less likely than Mike to get the start, and since Tatum's already slotted at #2, whoever doesn't start out of Mike Bell and Cedric Cobbs probably won't have any value unless Shanahan DRASTICALLY changes all of his past tendencies.

Anyway, I think Denver RB owners really lucked out this week. While no RB is going to get a huge chunk of carries, St. Louis's defense is so brutally awful that any Denver RB with 12 carries will probably be a pretty solid play this week. I'd bump Tatum up about 8 slots on the cheatsheet rankings, and bump Mike Bell up 8-10 slots, maybe 12 at the outside. Just my best guess- and really, at this point, that's all anyone is doing. Guessing.

Anyway, here's the article:

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/spor...4974166,00.html

ENGLEWOOD - Let's clear up one widespread misconception about the great Broncos running back mystery:

It's not that Mike Shanahan refuses to disclose who will start the season-opener in St. Louis on Sunday. It's that he doesn't know.

At least, that's his story.

He mentioned this when I began investigating his clever psychological ploy by asking him how Rams rookie head coach Scott Linehan's game plan might change, depending on the identity of the Broncos starting back.

"It probably wouldn't change," Shanahan said.

"I just really don't know at this time. I'm not trying to be coy. We've got three guys that I feel can run the football and three guys that can block. We'll watch how they practice this week and go with our gut feeling."

And here I was looking up his maneuver in The Art of War. The thing is, I couldn't quite figure out what the point of it was. So I asked Linehan the same thing.

"I just watched the preseason games, and all three of those guys look pretty good to me," he said. "I got to be honest with you, we're worried about whoever they put out there."

"Would it change your game plan to know who it was?" I asked.

"No, I don't think so. I think the system they run there is pretty cut and dried. I think we've got to stop that running game, that running style that the Broncos run so well."

(As you may know, the Broncos were blown out of last season's opener in the oppressive heat and humidity of Miami. Linehan was the Dolphins offensive coordinator at the time, so I asked if he's considered turning up the thermostat in the Edward Jones Dome to about 95. "No, I'd be afraid it would kill us first," he said.)

Frankly, I'm not sure this guy needs any more psyching out. He's a first-year head coach with a team that went 6-10 last year. The identity of the Broncos starting running back is the least of his problems.

The candidates, as you may know, are Mike Bell, Tatum Bell and Cedric Cobbs. Each did pretty well in the preseason. Shanahan named Mike Bell, a rookie free agent, the starter before the first preseason game. That's still what the depth chart says.

If it is a psychological ploy, I began to consider possible targets other than Linehan. Anyone who interacts with the running backs. Jake the Snake, for example.

Now, you should know that Jake began his first midweek news conference of the season by saying he'd missed us.

As you can see, lying is more acceptable in sports than some other places. It's similar to politics that way. Players and coaches often feel justified in lying to protect information that might compromise their chance to win the big game. Or the season-opener, as the case may be.

So, Jake, do defenses adjust depending on the running back?

"Not really," Jake said. "They're not going to have three different sets for three different backs. They only have as much practice time as we have, so they're going to have to adjust to whoever is carrying the ball."

Plummer complimented all the candidates, but when I asked if it made any difference to his game which one it turns out to be, he replied, "Not at all."

Next, I tried fullback Kyle Johnson. Perhaps he blocks differently depending on the back.

"I would think that Cecil (Sapp, the other fullback) or I would want to block as best we could for anybody," he said. "Maybe some backs have a different style. I don't think that you feel it outright. You do your job, and a good back reacts."

I still hadn't found anybody who felt it even mattered. The runners themselves, I thought. It must matter to them.

Mike Bell, what's the difference if you're the starter?

"As long as I've been playing football, I've always prepared like I was the starter, even when I wasn't," Bell said. "So I wouldn't really know. It's pretty much the same for me."

Cedric Cobbs, what's the difference to you?

"Whether I play, whether I don't play, I'm still going to take that same perspective and go into Week 2 and do the same thing that I'm doing this week, and that's prepare to be the starter of the game. And if I happen to be the starter, then I'm ready. And if I don't, then I'm still going to be ready."

As much as I'd like to credit Shanahan for a shrewd pregame gambit, I have to admit, I'm having trouble divining a benefit.

Maybe he really can't make up his mind. I mean, even as a journalist, you sometimes have to consider the possibility that Shanahan is telling the truth, remote as it might be.

So far as I can tell, they can draw straws right now for all the difference it makes. Which back starts Sunday is a compelling mystery, full of intrigue, signifying absolutely nothing.

Talk about a great sports story.

 

[massraider]

I think the answer is just to have two threads. One for Tatum owners, and one for Mike owners. That way, instead of asking the same question over and over, till they get the answer they want, they can cruise right into the "tatum thread", and hear from the other posters how obvious it is that Tatum will be the man. Like wise for the Mike thread.

 

[Trap Play]

What about a Cedric Cobbs thread?

 

[mbuehner]

The problem is it really doesnt matter who starts. Mike Bell could have 5 carries in the first quarter and never be heard from again... if they are bad carries and somebody else picks up the ball. Or he could rush for 120 and 2td. Who knows?