Denver RB "situation" (1 Viewer)

[The Z Machine]

Let me start off with saying that I didn't watch the Week 9 game, of those of you that did, please chime in with your thoughts on the actual performance of Mike Bell and the O-line as a whole against Pitt.

So with Mike putting up 28 yards rushing on 17 carries for a 1.7 yard average. Obviously this is far below the 9.1 YPC he had last week. Luckily for those that started him, he did chip in with another 40 yards receiving on 5 catches, so it wasn't a total failure there. Pretty much the total yards that were expected against Pitt, but not in the way that was envisioned. Furthermore, he had a long run of 4 yards, so obviously he didn't break anything long all day... the one cut and into the secondary probably wasn't even there and he was running into the pile a lot (this is just by looking at the stats, correct me if I'm wrong).

A few questions:

1) What went wrong or what was different this week vs. last week. Was the D keying on the run and putting 8 in the box, forcing Plummer to beat them in the air?

2) Obviously Mike Bell isn't the second coming of Barry Sanders, creating yardage out of nothing. Have other teams gotten a "game plan" about how to corral him?

3) How much adverse impact does this have on his potential going forward. Will Shanny think that Mike played well enough against a tough team, and helped secure the win? Or will he look more closely at the stats (and/or game film, not sure) and think that Tatum can do better (when healthy)

4) The real question is, how healthy is Tatum Bell, and can be be as effective as he was to start the season?

 

[lord_helmet]

Not easy reading Shannys thoughts but I would guess that the Broncos will be really happy to get Tatum back, and yes I think he is head and shoulders the best back on their roster

 

[johnnybronco]

i thought Mike played decent considering it was the Pitts defense and their run defense is still top 7 in the league.

he did make some key first downs towards the end, especially the catch and run for 9 yards in the 4th quarter that continued a key drive.

all in all, i still think tatum comes back to less of a workload. he just can't handle a full workload.

 

[SSOG]

Denver struggles running against the 3-4 defense. End of story. Nothing to see here, move along.

I've been saying this for over a year now. In the last 3 years, only twice has Denver matched its season averages in rushes, yards, *OR* yards per carry (any one of the three) against a 3-4 defense. They twice had good rushing games against a BRUTAL Oakland defense that made an ill-advised switch to the 3-4 in 2003, and that's it. In every other game against a 3-4 defense, Denver has been held below its average carries, below its average yards, *AND* below its average yards per carry.

 

[lord_helmet]

Denver struggles running against the 3-4 defense. End of story. Nothing to see here, move along.I've been saying this for over a year now. In the last 3 years, only twice has Denver matched its season averages in rushes, yards, *OR* yards per carry (any one of the three) against a 3-4 defense. They twice had good rushing games against a BRUTAL Oakland defense that made an ill-advised switch to the 3-4 in 2003, and that's it. In every other game against a 3-4 defense, Denver has been held below its average carries, below its average yards, *AND* below its average yards per carry.

I'm not basing anything on this game, I just think Tatum LOOKS better carrying the rock. Not to mention that MB seems to be easily winded, I wonder if he is in peak condition

 

[The Z Machine]

I'm not basing anything on this game, I just think Tatum LOOKS better carrying the rock. Not to mention that MB seems to be easily winded, I wonder if he is in peak condition

This is often a problem for unheralded rookies. They don't seem to have the workload as a feature back going against tough Ds in college.

 

[SSOG]

Denver struggles running against the 3-4 defense. End of story. Nothing to see here, move along.

I've been saying this for over a year now. In the last 3 years, only twice has Denver matched its season averages in rushes, yards, *OR* yards per carry (any one of the three) against a 3-4 defense. They twice had good rushing games against a BRUTAL Oakland defense that made an ill-advised switch to the 3-4 in 2003, and that's it. In every other game against a 3-4 defense, Denver has been held below its average carries, below its average yards, *AND* below its average yards per carry.

I'm not basing anything on this game, I just think Tatum LOOKS better carrying the rock. Not to mention that MB seems to be easily winded, I wonder if he is in peak condition

Tatum has looked better carrying the rock in some weeks, and has looked worse carrying the rock in others. Regardless, Tatum's numbers have dropped SIGNIFICANTLY from where they were last year. His ypc dropped from 5.3 to 4.5. He's clearly lost all explosiveness, averaging 4.0 ypc or less on carries 1-5 and carries 11+ (and then 6.2 ypc on carries 6-10). He's averaging a 20+ yard run once every 45.7 carries, as opposed to last year when he broke a 20+ yarder once every 17.3 carries. He is quite clearly *NOT* flourishing in this role. Even if he's a slightly better every-carry back than Mike Bell, Shanahan might start giving MikeBell the majority of the carries just to keep Tatum fresh. Maybe Shanahan decides that the dropoff from Tatum to Mike is worth it to add that explosiveness back into the offense.

I'm not basing anything on this game, I just think Tatum LOOKS better carrying the rock. Not to mention that MB seems to be easily winded, I wonder if he is in peak condition

This is often a problem for unheralded rookies. They don't seem to have the workload as a feature back going against tough Ds in college.

What? Mike Bell most certainly had the workload, leading Arizona State in rushing yardage for four straight seasons. And he played in the Pac-10, so he faced the same defenses as a Reggie Bush, and it's not like Bush is havi... so he faced the same defenses as Maurice Jones-Drew, and it's not like Jones-Drew is having any problems.He's not coming from Eastern Southeastern Western Tulsa State Baptist here. Mike Bell played for a BCS conference school against BCS conference teams. If his team really stunk, then you'd think that would only be an advantage, since he was more used to shouldering the load when overmatched.

 

[lord_helmet]

Numbers don't lie right ? Fact remains I like Tatum better than Mike, will Tatum be more explosive in limited action, it seems so. But I don't really care about all that, what I want is for the Donks to win

FF back - I'll still rather have Tatum

 

[The Z Machine]

Tatum has looked better carrying the rock in some weeks, and has looked worse carrying the rock in others. Regardless, Tatum's numbers have dropped SIGNIFICANTLY from where they were last year. His ypc dropped from 5.3 to 4.5. He's clearly lost all explosiveness, averaging 4.0 ypc or less on carries 1-5 and carries 11+ (and then 6.2 ypc on carries 6-10). He's averaging a 20+ yard run once every 45.7 carries, as opposed to last year when he broke a 20+ yarder once every 17.3 carries. He is quite clearly *NOT* flourishing in this role. Even if he's a slightly better every-carry back than Mike Bell, Shanahan might start giving MikeBell the majority of the carries just to keep Tatum fresh. Maybe Shanahan decides that the dropoff from Tatum to Mike is worth it to add that explosiveness back into the offense.

I'm not basing anything on this game, I just think Tatum LOOKS better carrying the rock. Not to mention that MB seems to be easily winded, I wonder if he is in peak condition

This is often a problem for unheralded rookies. They don't seem to have the workload as a feature back going against tough Ds in college.

What? Mike Bell most certainly had the workload, leading Arizona State in rushing yardage for four straight seasons. And he played in the Pac-10, so he faced the same defenses as a Reggie Bush, and it's not like Bush is havi... so he faced the same defenses as Maurice Jones-Drew, and it's not like Jones-Drew is having any problems.He's not coming from Eastern Southeastern Western Tulsa State Baptist here. Mike Bell played for a BCS conference school against BCS conference teams. If his team really stunk, then you'd think that would only be an advantage, since he was more used to shouldering the load when overmatched.

First off, Mike Bell went to Arizona, not ASU.I don't want to dig too deep, but he was NOT an elite back ever in college.

2005 - 952 yards, 4.8 YPC, #7 in the Pac10

2004 - 950 yards, 4.7 YPC, #5 in the Pac10

2003 - 920 yards, 5.5 YPC, #4 in the Pac10

2002 - 341 yards, 3.2 YPC. #17 in the Pac10

He never broke 1000 yards, and he never had more than 5.5 YPC. He simply doesn't match up to his contemporaries in the Pac10, like Steven Jackson, LenDale White, Reggie Bush, Joe Echemandu, J.J. Arrington, Marshawn, Lynch, or even Maurice Jones-Drew.

So let me revise... he may have gotten the workload, but he really didn't do #### with it during his college career.

 

[Michael Fox Fan]

Denver struggles running against the 3-4 defense. End of story. Nothing to see here, move along.

I've been saying this for over a year now. In the last 3 years, only twice has Denver matched its season averages in rushes, yards, *OR* yards per carry (any one of the three) against a 3-4 defense. They twice had good rushing games against a BRUTAL Oakland defense that made an ill-advised switch to the 3-4 in 2003, and that's it. In every other game against a 3-4 defense, Denver has been held below its average carries, below its average yards, *AND* below its average yards per carry.

Denver's 2006 averages:31 carries per game

4.8 yards per carry

150 rushing yards per game

Games where they exceeded these numbers:

1) Week 3 vs. the Patriots: 34 carries [for *only* 144 yards]

2) Week 7 vs. the Browns: 37 carries for 150 yards

So yeah, in weeks 5 (Baltimore) and 9 (Pittsburgh) your statement in bold is accurate this year. For weeks 3 and 7, your statement is only partially true. I understand the sentiment: Denver DOES tend to do worse versus the 3-4, and the numbers bear that out. I just have issues with absolute statements that are incorrect.

Thanks for all of your posts on the Denver RBs during camp and pre-season....always great stuff.

 

[Two Deep]

Ah, the old I think my guy is better , NO MY GUY IS BETTER thread.

 

[Wheelhouse]

Ah, the old I think my guy is better , NO MY GUY IS BETTER thread.

 

[FFdork]

My guy is clearly better.

 

[WarRedbirds]

Tatum has looked better carrying the rock in some weeks, and has looked worse carrying the rock in others. Regardless, Tatum's numbers have dropped SIGNIFICANTLY from where they were last year. His ypc dropped from 5.3 to 4.5. He's clearly lost all explosiveness, averaging 4.0 ypc or less on carries 1-5 and carries 11+ (and then 6.2 ypc on carries 6-10). He's averaging a 20+ yard run once every 45.7 carries, as opposed to last year when he broke a 20+ yarder once every 17.3 carries. He is quite clearly *NOT* flourishing in this role. Even if he's a slightly better every-carry back than Mike Bell, Shanahan might start giving MikeBell the majority of the carries just to keep Tatum fresh. Maybe Shanahan decides that the dropoff from Tatum to Mike is worth it to add that explosiveness back into the offense.

I'm not basing anything on this game, I just think Tatum LOOKS better carrying the rock. Not to mention that MB seems to be easily winded, I wonder if he is in peak condition

This is often a problem for unheralded rookies. They don't seem to have the workload as a feature back going against tough Ds in college.

What? Mike Bell most certainly had the workload, leading Arizona State in rushing yardage for four straight seasons. And he played in the Pac-10, so he faced the same defenses as a Reggie Bush, and it's not like Bush is havi... so he faced the same defenses as Maurice Jones-Drew, and it's not like Jones-Drew is having any problems.He's not coming from Eastern Southeastern Western Tulsa State Baptist here. Mike Bell played for a BCS conference school against BCS conference teams. If his team really stunk, then you'd think that would only be an advantage, since he was more used to shouldering the load when overmatched.

First off, Mike Bell went to Arizona, not ASU.I don't want to dig too deep, but he was NOT an elite back ever in college.

2005 - 952 yards, 4.8 YPC, #7 in the Pac10

2004 - 950 yards, 4.7 YPC, #5 in the Pac10

2003 - 920 yards, 5.5 YPC, #4 in the Pac10

2002 - 341 yards, 3.2 YPC. #17 in the Pac10

He never broke 1000 yards, and he never had more than 5.5 YPC. He simply doesn't match up to his contemporaries in the Pac10, like Steven Jackson, LenDale White, Reggie Bush, Joe Echemandu, J.J. Arrington, Marshawn, Lynch, or even Maurice Jones-Drew.

So let me revise... he may have gotten the workload, but he really didn't do #### with it during his college career.

Those Arizona teams were dog####. Had Bell played with the lines of the Oregon State, USC, or Cal teams that you are referring to, he would have put up three 1000 yard season easy. I'm not saying that Bell is as good as some of those players you listed, but comparing the stats of those backs in college is apples to oranges...

 

[SSOG]

Tatum has looked better carrying the rock in some weeks, and has looked worse carrying the rock in others. Regardless, Tatum's numbers have dropped SIGNIFICANTLY from where they were last year. His ypc dropped from 5.3 to 4.5. He's clearly lost all explosiveness, averaging 4.0 ypc or less on carries 1-5 and carries 11+ (and then 6.2 ypc on carries 6-10). He's averaging a 20+ yard run once every 45.7 carries, as opposed to last year when he broke a 20+ yarder once every 17.3 carries. He is quite clearly *NOT* flourishing in this role. Even if he's a slightly better every-carry back than Mike Bell, Shanahan might start giving MikeBell the majority of the carries just to keep Tatum fresh. Maybe Shanahan decides that the dropoff from Tatum to Mike is worth it to add that explosiveness back into the offense.

I'm not basing anything on this game, I just think Tatum LOOKS better carrying the rock. Not to mention that MB seems to be easily winded, I wonder if he is in peak condition

This is often a problem for unheralded rookies. They don't seem to have the workload as a feature back going against tough Ds in college.

What? Mike Bell most certainly had the workload, leading Arizona State in rushing yardage for four straight seasons. And he played in the Pac-10, so he faced the same defenses as a Reggie Bush, and it's not like Bush is havi... so he faced the same defenses as Maurice Jones-Drew, and it's not like Jones-Drew is having any problems.He's not coming from Eastern Southeastern Western Tulsa State Baptist here. Mike Bell played for a BCS conference school against BCS conference teams. If his team really stunk, then you'd think that would only be an advantage, since he was more used to shouldering the load when overmatched.

First off, Mike Bell went to Arizona, not ASU.I don't want to dig too deep, but he was NOT an elite back ever in college.

2005 - 952 yards, 4.8 YPC, #7 in the Pac10

2004 - 950 yards, 4.7 YPC, #5 in the Pac10

2003 - 920 yards, 5.5 YPC, #4 in the Pac10

2002 - 341 yards, 3.2 YPC. #17 in the Pac10

He never broke 1000 yards, and he never had more than 5.5 YPC. He simply doesn't match up to his contemporaries in the Pac10, like Steven Jackson, LenDale White, Reggie Bush, Joe Echemandu, J.J. Arrington, Marshawn, Lynch, or even Maurice Jones-Drew.

So let me revise... he may have gotten the workload, but he really didn't do #### with it during his college career.

True, but your issue with him was that he seemed to be wearing down, and you blamed that on his workload. His workload is fine.Now, if you want to talk about some unproductive college RBs (another arguement entirely), allow me to point you in the direction of one "Fast" Willie Parker.

Denver struggles running against the 3-4 defense. End of story. Nothing to see here, move along.

I've been saying this for over a year now. In the last 3 years, only twice has Denver matched its season averages in rushes, yards, *OR* yards per carry (any one of the three) against a 3-4 defense. They twice had good rushing games against a BRUTAL Oakland defense that made an ill-advised switch to the 3-4 in 2003, and that's it. In every other game against a 3-4 defense, Denver has been held below its average carries, below its average yards, *AND* below its average yards per carry.

Denver's 2006 averages:31 carries per game

4.8 yards per carry

150 rushing yards per game

Games where they exceeded these numbers:

1) Week 3 vs. the Patriots: 34 carries [for *only* 144 yards]

2) Week 7 vs. the Browns: 37 carries for 150 yards

So yeah, in weeks 5 (Baltimore) and 9 (Pittsburgh) your statement in bold is accurate this year. For weeks 3 and 7, your statement is only partially true. I understand the sentiment: Denver DOES tend to do worse versus the 3-4, and the numbers bear that out. I just have issues with absolute statements that are incorrect.

Thanks for all of your posts on the Denver RBs during camp and pre-season....always great stuff.

I don't use numbers from this year because Denver's per-game averages aren't set yet. I mean, if Denver rushes 50 times a game for 250 yards a game from here on out, those New England and Cleveland games are going to look quite a bit worse. At the end of the season, I'll go back over the results and see if I need to alter my statements regarding Denver and the 3-4.

 

[Marc Levin]

Denver struggles running against the 3-4 defense. End of story. Nothing to see here, move along.

I've been saying this for over a year now. In the last 3 years, only twice has Denver matched its season averages in rushes, yards, *OR* yards per carry (any one of the three) against a 3-4 defense. They twice had good rushing games against a BRUTAL Oakland defense that made an ill-advised switch to the 3-4 in 2003, and that's it. In every other game against a 3-4 defense, Denver has been held below its average carries, below its average yards, *AND* below its average yards per carry.

Denver's 2006 averages:31 carries per game

4.8 yards per carry

150 rushing yards per game

Games where they exceeded these numbers:

1) Week 3 vs. the Patriots: 34 carries [for *only* 144 yards]

2) Week 7 vs. the Browns: 37 carries for 150 yards

So yeah, in weeks 5 (Baltimore) and 9 (Pittsburgh) your statement in bold is accurate this year. For weeks 3 and 7, your statement is only partially true. I understand the sentiment: Denver DOES tend to do worse versus the 3-4, and the numbers bear that out. I just have issues with absolute statements that are incorrect.

Thanks for all of your posts on the Denver RBs during camp and pre-season....always great stuff.

And the Indie game - as a team:36-227-6.3 ( )

 

[Marc Levin]

I agree that MBell does not have breakaway speed, but I disagree that he is not explosive.

He runs the classic one-cut and he is explosive hitting the hole after that one cut (at least that was how he looked in preseason and in the Indie game).

He's also a much better pass catcher, and he is better at getting his body forward when tackled and at leaving a defender behind him when he runs through tackles. That means he has initial burst - a better burst than Tatum, IMO.

But once Tatum gets a couple of paces into his run, he is much faster.

I believe decisiveness at hitting the holes will be the deciding point for Shanahan - and Tatum's decisiveness was clearly limited two weeks ago due to the turf toe(s).

 

[lord_helmet]

Ah, the old I think my guy is better , NO MY GUY IS BETTER thread.

Only own Tatum in one league, but I also have MB and even Cobbs rostered (53 man roster)Thanks for playing tho

 

[Oils_well]

Has anyone considered how well Plummer has played in the last two games with Mike Bell in there?

Is there any correlation?

Correct me if im wrong Jake was really on the firing line 3 weeks ago, could this be a result of improved running and blocking?