Now the DEN RB situation gets stickier (1 Viewer)

[mnmplayer]

I'm not questioning this information, but if this was a morning press conference, surely it would have made an article, fanball blurb, rotonews... something?

it was shown live at about 12:30pm PAC on espn Monday Morning Quaterback.

 

[Pigskin75]

Someone asked about what Shanny said in the Monday morning press conf.

I'm not questioning this information, but if this was a morning press conference, surely it would have made an article, fanball blurb, rotonews... something? I'm expecting a week of Q, Hearst, and Bell all being used with the first team in preparation for Tampa, and I have no idea what to expect next week. If I had to guess, I expect about 28-30 carries divided pretty equally. RBBC. :(

I went to the Denver papers first Chaos, nothing. I had to go to the official Broncos website to hear the press conference. If someone finds a transcript, please provide a link. That's blogger worthy.I don't care who gets the rock, I just want them on my team. Bell is on our wire and I'm seriously considering him. Problem is, to me he seems injury prone. You pick the guy, he starts, breaks a nail and you're @#$% outta luck.

Q seems more durable in spite of his size.

I really saw some good moves week one. I saw no holes yesterday. It reminded me of Ricky Williams in New Orleans that first season. You can't run when three guys have you pinned in the backfield.

 

[GoNads]

Someone asked about what Shanny said in the Monday morning press conf. He indicated that no one could have run behind his Denver line that day because blocking was so poor and that Q is still his man. He said of all his carries, only 2 could have been improved upon. The others he said Q had no chance because of the poor run blocking.In response to a reporter ripping on Q he said that "Maybe SD will drop LT because he only ran for 2.6 yards per carry and that maybe Denver will pick him up next week when SD drops him." indicating that even the best RB cannot run when the line does not block well.He seemd somewhat protective of Q and said he "liked his attitude." Looks like it may not be lights out for him yet, although Shanny has been known to tell lies in the past.He also gave props to Plummer for throwing 2 TD, no picks and almost 300 yards. He mentioned that SD gave them some great passing opps and while taking away the run.I am not spinning this, just reporting what he said. I did not see the game, but it seems like SD might have leveraged a ton to stop the run and left the pass open. this is pure speculation on my part. I am a Q owner...Press is just ripping on Q and so most of this might just be shanny sticking up for him as he might any player.

Q owner too, so maybe I had my Q goggles on, but I was watching the game very closely, and was left with the impression that he had nowhere to run. I would've said this earlier, but it wouldn't mean much. That said, it's encouraging to me to hear Shannahan say sort of the same thing (even though we all know how he can be).As I said before though, and as most agree, I actually think the fumbling is more worrisome than the YPC; did he say anything about that at all?

 

[bostonfred2]

I appreciate the fact that you look at this as a fluid situation as that's what I see as well. I just happened to have hitched my RB3 wagon to Griffin, and obviously wish that he keeps the starting gig.

I'm not calling you out for doing it, and I'm sorry if it came across that way - in fact, I actually should have taken your name out of the original quote. That said, you just hit on my biggest hot button issue, and the one I was trying to address. Why do people's opinions on players have to change the moment they draft?

I try to look at each player's value, not as I hope it will be, but as I believe it is going forward. I think its easier for me, because, between the various survivor leagues on this board and the regular leagues I'm in, I have so many teams right now I own almost everyone except players I think are overvalued, and I'm even watching them to see when their value drops to a point I think they're worth picking up. I've found this makes me a lot less emotional about players.

If more of us can focus on talking about different options instead of taking arbitrary sides based on who we happen to have on our own fantasy teams, we'll all be better as a board. There's information to be gained either way, but you get a lot more from a discussion when you strip out the obvious agendas.

For example, do you think someone should go get Bell right now? Wait till next week? Should I go get Griffin while these terrible articles are out there? If I have him, should I dump Griffin before his value drops through the floor? What if I have both? Should I panic? What if the owner of both is panicking? If he isn't, how can I subtly get him to?

I'd get more out of those conversations at a strategy level than I do out of these discussions that inevitably lead to "Where are all the Griffin man lovers now!?!" (again, not trying to call anyone out, just making a point)

In spite of my wishes, however, I have not gone "out on a limb" at all regarding this issue because I believe it's foolish to do so, and I have let that opinion be clearly known.

btw, I appreciate your advice, but I had already been trying to trade for Bell since the day after our draft (******* took him in round 6), but to no avail so far.

I agree, it's not always that easy.

I am not emotionally married to this situation, but don't like being erroneously called out; that's all.

Again, sorry if it came across as a dig at you directly. I was just using your post as a starting point to say that there are some people on the other side of the argument who are not "Bell lovers" but who have taken the Griffin-ain't-the-only-Denver-RB stance and yet still agreed that Bell's value took a knock when he got hurt. The reason I make the point is specifically because this board is so valuable in the offseason, and I think a culture change is needed to see the same value in the regular season. A lot of that has happened organically - the way the board responds when people post news, rumors and hoaxes is amazing - but these types of discussion would benefit from a directed change.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

MT - I know no one here has put any stock into the statements I made before the draft (when Shanny drafted Bell) but I have to tell you that, from my point of view, Q will seldom have running room in this offense. He is simply not tall enough to see the elbow to wrist area of the Denver O-line's arms - which keeps him from catching the flow of the holes in this Denver scheme. The reason the Denver O-Line is so dominant is that they don't give any hints/clues to the guys they're blocking by "pointing" with their feet and legs. They drive off the line with arms and upper body more than with pure foot speed and leg positioning. It's why their counters/draws/other pull-blocks work so well. A RB has to be able to see over his linemen's shoulders in order to see what's going on. That's how Portis got his chest caved in. That's why their knees keep getting torn up. That's why Q might be a brilliant back somewhere else in the league, but will simply not cut it in Denver.Q had a great game against KC this year and a great game against Indy last year. Neither of those teams have D-lines physical enough against the run to require serious hole placement adjustments. Q didn't have to see what was going on to be able to hit the hole at full burst. Anyone else, he's going to disappoint.

This is an argument that Q will not be able to find the holes, while another RB may be able to.But that is not what happened yesterday. There were no holes to find. Portis wouldn't have done much better. (Mike Anderson probably would have, because he can turn a 0 yard gain into a 1 yard gain by moving the pile a bit.)

 

[bostonfred2]

Someone asked about what Shanny said in the Monday morning press conf. He indicated that no one could have run behind his Denver line that day because blocking was so poor and that Q is still his man. He said of all his carries, only 2 could have been improved upon. The others he said Q had no chance because of the poor run blocking.In response to a reporter ripping on Q he said that "Maybe SD will drop LT because he only ran for 2.6 yards per carry and that maybe Denver will pick him up next week when SD drops him." indicating that even the best RB cannot run when the line does not block well.He seemd somewhat protective of Q and said he "liked his attitude." Looks like it may not be lights out for him yet, although Shanny has been known to tell lies in the past.He also gave props to Plummer for throwing 2 TD, no picks and almost 300 yards. He mentioned that SD gave them some great passing opps and while taking away the run.I am not spinning this, just reporting what he said. I did not see the game, but it seems like SD might have leveraged a ton to stop the run and left the pass open. this is pure speculation on my part. I am a Q owner...Press is just ripping on Q and so most of this might just be shanny sticking up for him as he might any player.

I think it's obvious that San Diego tried to stop the run, and it doesn't surprise me that Griffin couldn't have gotten more yards running against that defense. The big question is whether Shanahan feels that another back could have gotten more yards running against that defense, or more importantly, whether he intends to find out. I'd expect Shanahan to be protective of Griffin until he knows what else he's got. For the first time in years, there's not a former Denver rusher who's had 1000+ on the roster right now, so he's really not in a position to say "Well, Griffin sucked this week, and we're going to try someone else". And he sure isn't going to stoke the fire by saying "You're right, we'll start Bell (or Hearst, or Droughns) this week". Why would he possibly whip up that frenzy? If anything, you'll hear Mort or Clayton come out on Friday or Sunday with a tidbit saying "(insert running back here) may get some carries this week", then see that he gets the entire load - or that he gets no carries at all - or that it's a complete RBBC - or that another back actually gets all of the carries and has a huge day. That's the Shanahan that people in fantasy football leagues have cursed for years. Right now I think I'm benching all of them this week if I have an alternative, and waiting till things shake out. I'd be interested in hearing what others think is a good strategy here.

 

[Pigskin75]

If anything, you'll hear Mort or Clayton come out on Friday or Sunday with a tidbit saying "(insert running back here) may get some carries this week", then see that he gets the entire load - or that he gets no carries at all - or that it's a complete RBBC - or that another back actually gets all of the carries and has a huge day. That's the Shanahan that people in fantasy football leagues have cursed for years. Right now I think I'm benching all of them this week if I have an alternative, and waiting till things shake out. I'd be interested in hearing what others think is a good strategy here.

That fact the Shanahan is in control has been my greatest fear. I've had Denver backs before and had to deal with Shanny's card-to-the-vest press conferences. I totally understand why he does it, he's about winning games and gamesmanship is part of the deal.It just doesn't help us very much. As far as strategy as I mentioned Bell is on our wire and I could grab him early. I don't believe anyone does the kind of research I do so I have an advantage in this area. I could hold off until later in the week but if news breaks on ESPN I'm toast. I'm 3-0, ranked #1 in total points so I'm at the bottom of our waver wire.

 

[bostonfred2]

If anything, you'll hear Mort or Clayton come out on Friday or Sunday with a tidbit saying "(insert running back here) may get some carries this week", then see that he gets the entire load - or that he gets no carries at all - or that it's a complete RBBC - or that another back actually gets all of the carries and has a huge day. That's the Shanahan that people in fantasy football leagues have cursed for years. Right now I think I'm benching all of them this week if I have an alternative, and waiting till things shake out. I'd be interested in hearing what others think is a good strategy here.

That fact the Shanahan is in control has been my greatest fear. I've had Denver backs before and had to deal with Shanny's card-to-the-vest press conferences. I totally understand why he does it, he's about winning games and gamesmanship is part of the deal.It just doesn't help us very much.

Well, as much as it sucks sometimes, the good thing about Shanahan's RB selection are that he won't tell you when things are changing, but once things have changed for good, he won't change again for no reason or use RBBC. So at least that's somewhat predictable. In the meantime, you just have to watch for signs that a change might be brewing, and it looks (despite the press conference to the contrary) like those signs are there.

 

[Family Matters]

OK, I've had enough guys. Just stop it. This MB shouting is making my eyes hurt. See, they're buggin out. Oh, and go Q!

 

[Biabreakable]

It does appear to be a nice buy low situation on Griffin right now depending on how heavily the Griffin owner invested in him. If it was a latter pick and you believe in him bouncing back from this with Skeletors support then it is worth a try I think if it does not cost you too much.If you are a Bell owner and do not have confidence in him emerging at some point this season then it is a good opportunity to sell him to the Griffin owner or possibly someone else. If you beleive in him then obviously just hang on.Personaly I still want nothing to do with either. I think the days of a Denver running back dominating may be on the shelf for now and we will see a mixture of rbs throughout the season although I admit Griffin had me thinking I was wrong about that after week one as well as what imo was a pretty decent performance against a stong Jacksonville run defense. I do want to give San Diego some credit however. I think thier defense is a lot better than it was last year.If I were thinking long term keeper or dynasty I favor Bell. I just don't think he will get untracked this year. I think he needs some seasoning and the Denver offense as a whole is transitioning.The answer to the fumbling issue is Garrison Hearst and it would not suprise me to see him hod the job for a spell or possibly increase sharing.I do not think any of these rbs belong in free agency. I just have not been willing to pay a high price for any of them in 2004 and I still wouldn't. Maybe this year won't trun out as bad as 2001 as far as Denver rbs are concerned but I do think it is a mess.I think it is possible that the hits might be taking a toll on Griffins body allready and that might have somthing to do with his ineffectivness but I did not watch this last game so I am unsure about that. It has been a concern of mine in regards to Griffin despite the logical and well thought out points against it.That is not to say that Bell is tough like Eddie George by any means and he certainly has not shown himself to be up to this point.I haven't seen any of these rbs as being top 15 caliber EOY although Griffins strong start did have me wondering about that a bit. The only Denver rb that has interested me was the one I could get for next to nothing. He got injured allready though.I think Shanahan is really behind his contemporaries in terms of shenagins at this point. The other coaches in the league have been copying him so well in this regard. Maybe he is being straight forward about things for now to lull us into actualy being able to rely on what he says so he can trick everyone again. Or maybe some bookie has a high price on his legs or somthing. :shrugs:

 

[Swanny]

Forgive me if this link is a Honda. Haven't seen it posted anywhere in this thread yet, but then again, I skipped over the majority of it.

My Webpage

I own Griffin, Bell, AND Hearst, so I really have no opinion as to runs the ball for Denver, as long as he runs it effectively. But I watched every down of that game yesterday, and there was absolutely no running room for Griffin. Guys usually don't carry the ball that many times for negative yards because they are picking the wrong holes or can't see holes because they're too short (as someone implied earlier in this thread). Yesterday, there were usually defensive players in the backfield by the time the ball was even in Griffin's hands.

The fumble is probably the thing that should concern Griffin owners most.

 

[GoNads]

If more of us can focus on talking about different options instead of taking arbitrary sides based on who we happen to have on our own fantasy teams, we'll all be better as a board. There's information to be gained either way, but you get a lot more from a discussion when you strip out the obvious agendas.For example, do you think someone should go get Bell right now? Wait till next week? Should I go get Griffin while these terrible articles are out there? If I have him, should I dump Griffin before his value drops through the floor? What if I have both? Should I panic? What if the owner of both is panicking? If he isn't, how can I subtly get him to?

You say sorry, no offense; I say: none taken.We basically see it the same way.To the first paragraph above: I couldn't agree more. That's what I have been trying to say; you did it with more eloquence.To the second: I think right now, if you have one of the two, IDEALLY you should try and get the other (that's what I am trying to do). However, Bell's value will undoubtedly increase (definitely more than what I am going to pay), and Q's value won't go down enough (he is still a starter). So, REALISTICALLY, I am thinking the best option will be to stay put and see what happens (that's what I am doing).I had the Bell owner considering Gordon for him before this weekend.

 

[On The Rocks]

ladies....ladies....take it outside.

 

[cstu]

I've agreed with Pony Boy all along on Q and have found it surprising that people have been ignoring Q's obvious deficiencies as an NFL back - especially in Denver. Sure, there weren't a lot of holes in the game but how long are you going to keep making excuses? Not only that but if the line was so bad, why was Griffin the only one not gaining positive yardage. I also don't remember the last time a Denver RB had back-to-back games this bad. Open your eyes Griffin owners!

 

[Family Matters]

Someone asked about what Shanny said in the Monday morning press conf. He indicated that no one could have run behind his Denver line that day because blocking was so poor and that Q is still his man. He said of all his carries, only 2 could have been improved upon. The others he said Q had no chance because of the poor run blocking.In response to a reporter ripping on Q he said that "Maybe SD will drop LT because he only ran for 2.6 yards per carry and that maybe Denver will pick him up next week when SD drops him." indicating that even the best RB cannot run when the line does not block well.He seemd somewhat protective of Q and said he "liked his attitude." Looks like it may not be lights out for him yet, although Shanny has been known to tell lies in the past.He also gave props to Plummer for throwing 2 TD, no picks and almost 300 yards. He mentioned that SD gave them some great passing opps and while taking away the run.I am not spinning this, just reporting what he said. I did not see the game, but it seems like SD might have leveraged a ton to stop the run and left the pass open. this is pure speculation on my part. I am a Q owner...Press is just ripping on Q and so most of this might just be shanny sticking up for him as he might any player.

Thanks for the update. Now that you've posted this it seems the debate has calmed down a bit. I hope they give Q a fair shake at this. IMO if he fails in the next 2 games they have to make a change. What I mean by that is assumming the O line is blocking (they usually do) if Griffin does not produce and/or puts the ball on the ground then I would make a change if I were the coach.As for the O line, how much of the blocking issues have to do with Denver losing their O line coach to Atlanta? He has a tremendous reputation and now that he's gone they are having some difficulty. This could be where the real problem lies.Doe anyone have any thoughts on the O line?

 

[Family Matters]

I've agreed with Pony Boy all along on Q and have found it surprising that people have been ignoring Q's obvious deficiencies as an NFL back - especially in Denver. Sure, there weren't a lot of holes in the game but how long are you going to keep making excuses? Not only that but if the line was so bad, why was Griffin the only one not gaining positive yardage. I also don't remember the last time a Denver RB had back-to-back games this bad. Open your eyes Griffin owners!

This post is surprising in that you offer only your opinion and support of Pony. Supporting Pony has nothing to do with Griff but OK. Nothing to support your comments regarding Griff. Look at these stats and tell me what RB really outperformed Q. There were three runs in the game longer than Q, 1 for 11 yards, 1 for 9 yards and 1 for 8. Boy, they should let Lelie in there at RB! You said sure there weren't a lot of holes in that game but how long are you going to keep making excuses? Well, do you mean for the O line? Last I checked, if there are no holes no one will be able to run through them. So maybe the problem isn't the RB's but maybe the line. I'm not sure as I have not seen 2 of the games to judge by. I guess you just don't like Griff but it would be nice to see something to actually support why you don't like him as a RB. You know, something tangable.

RUSHING ATT YDS TD LG G. Hearst     3 13 0 11 R. Droughns    2 10 0 9 Q. Griffin     12 7 0 6 A. Lelie       2 6 0 8 J. Plummer     2 1 0 1 T. Nalen      1 -4 0 0

 

[jurb26]

Thanks for the update. Now that you've posted this it seems the debate has calmed down a bit. I hope they give Q a fair shake at this. IMO if he fails in the next 2 games they have to make a change. What I mean by that is assumming the O line is blocking (they usually do) if Griffin does not produce and/or puts the ball on the ground then I would make a change if I were the coach.As for the O line, how much of the blocking issues have to do with Denver losing their O line coach to Atlanta? He has a tremendous reputation and now that he's gone they are having some difficulty. This could be where the real problem lies.Doe anyone have any thoughts on the O line?

FWIW, there were lots of people (myself included) who thought that the loss of the Oline coach and Portis would = the end of the Den stud RB this year. This is not saying that there will not be productivity from them, just not the STUD status we are used to. We are not there yet of course. I do however think that it is safe to assume that lossing these 2 very important people is having an effect right now. I find it hard to believe that Den will continue to be this bad the rest of the year though. I mean these guys couldn't have forgot how to block that fast, could they?Even still, its not just about the loss of him and Portis. Eventually, the league will catch up/wise up to every scheme. We may just be seeing that as well. Maybe teams have started to figure out how to slow down this vaunted Den rushing system. Well the exception of course being KC, but they couldn't stop they play even if they knew which one was going to be called. This should be interesting to watch through out the rest of the season thats for sure.

 

[Pigskin75]

I've agreed with Pony Boy all along on Q and have found it surprising that people have been ignoring Q's obvious deficiencies as an NFL back - especially in Denver. Sure, there weren't a lot of holes in the game but how long are you going to keep making excuses? Not only that but if the line was so bad, why was Griffin the only one not gaining positive yardage. I also don't remember the last time a Denver RB had back-to-back games this bad. Open your eyes Griffin owners!

I think our eyes, well, at least mine, are wide open. But I don't know if we can actually count these two games. The JAX game was against the premier run defense in the league...and he didn't really do that bad considering. This week, as I and several others have observed, it seems SD really game planned to stop the run. Speaking of open eyes, another thing I noticed was his pass blocking. As small as he is, he really had some difficulty from what I saw. He didn't hesitate from getting in the way, but that's about all he did, get in the way. I distinctly recall a belly fake into the line and as he came into the hole to block he just got nailed.I have to agree, long term, I don't think Q fits the bill. Short term, I'm undecided. We're just observers. Shanny and his coaches are professionals and I think their talent evaluation skills are better than any of us. Right now they see something in Q and apparently believe he has talent.This week he goes against a TB defense that appears to be living on their past reputation as they let big ol' Wheatly ring `em up for 102 and a touch. If big ol' Wheat can do that, a jitter bug might have some fun next week.

 

[Family Matters]

Thanks for the update. Now that you've posted this it seems the debate has calmed down a bit. I hope they give Q a fair shake at this. IMO if he fails in the next 2 games they have to make a change. What I mean by that is assumming the O line is blocking (they usually do) if Griffin does not produce and/or puts the ball on the ground then I would make a change if I were the coach.As for the O line, how much of the blocking issues have to do with Denver losing their O line coach to Atlanta? He has a tremendous reputation and now that he's gone they are having some difficulty. This could be where the real problem lies.Doe anyone have any thoughts on the O line?

FWIW, there were lots of people (myself included) who thought that the loss of the Oline coach and Portis would = the end of the Den stud RB this year. This is not saying that there will not be productivity from them, just not the STUD status we are used to. We are not there yet of course. I do however think that it is safe to assume that lossing these 2 very important people is having an effect right now. I find it hard to believe that Den will continue to be this bad the rest of the year though. I mean these guys couldn't have forgot how to block that fast, could they?Even still, its not just about the loss of him and Portis. Eventually, the league will catch up/wise up to every scheme. We may just be seeing that as well. Maybe teams have started to figure out how to slow down this vaunted Den rushing system. Well the exception of course being KC, but they couldn't stop they play even if they knew which one was going to be called. This should be interesting to watch through out the rest of the season thats for sure.

Intersting Jurb. Time will tell about the O line. If you're right it I agree it may be the end of past RB performances in Denver.

 

[jurb26]

This week, as I and several others have observed, it seems SD really game planned to stop the run.

I think this is where people need to open there eyes to be honest. Given Den's history of running the ball do you honestly think that SD is the 1st and only team to have tried to do this!?!? Every team that played them last year tired to stop them from running the ball and they would all be foolish if they didn't this year as well. This is the most well know running system of the modern era! Team are not going to stop trying to shut down the Den running game and have tried to do so the past 6-7 years. Its the fact that this year, they have actually begun to have rather good successs at stoping it. This is the part that becomes alarming, not that team have taken notice to it.

 

[mnmplayer]

If big ol' Wheat can do that, a jitter bug might have some fun next week.

I don't know about this. Wheat ran over half the secondary and gained over half his yards on one carry. TB is a speed defense and will might match up well vs Q.

 

[Family Matters]

I've agreed with Pony Boy all along on Q and have found it surprising that people have been ignoring Q's obvious deficiencies as an NFL back - especially in Denver. Sure, there weren't a lot of holes in the game but how long are you going to keep making excuses? Not only that but if the line was so bad, why was Griffin the only one not gaining positive yardage. I also don't remember the last time a Denver RB had back-to-back games this bad. Open your eyes Griffin owners!

I think our eyes, well, at least mine, are wide open. But I don't know if we can actually count these two games. The JAX game was against the premier run defense in the league...and he didn't really do that bad considering. This week, as I and several others have observed, it seems SD really game planned to stop the run. Speaking of open eyes, another thing I noticed was his pass blocking. As small as he is, he really had some difficulty from what I saw. He didn't hesitate from getting in the way, but that's about all he did, get in the way. I distinctly recall a belly fake into the line and as he came into the hole to block he just got nailed.I have to agree, long term, I don't think Q fits the bill. Short term, I'm undecided. We're just observers. Shanny and his coaches are professionals and I think their talent evaluation skills are better than any of us. Right now they see something in Q and apparently believe he has talent.This week he goes against a TB defense that appears to be living on their past reputation as they let big ol' Wheatly ring `em up for 102 and a touch. If big ol' Wheat can do that, a jitter bug might have some fun next week.

Another point about the TB run D. Historically, they have had trouble stopping big strong RB's that can run between the tackles. They aren't very strong on the interior line but very quick LB's and good support from their safeties. Explains Wheatley's success but Fargas had good results as well. IMO, Griff could have a tough time against the Bucs unless they get superior blocking and can cutback against them.

 

[Gridiron King]

Where are all the Q Griffin lovers now? His days are numbered as the starter with all the fumbles and Tatum Bell getting ready to play! If you didn't start him week 1 or trade him since you missed the boat.

 

[beef]

Did you just get back from the weekend?

 

[CaptainHucklebuck]

Just to bring some of these threads together, here's a reply to Maurile Tremblay I gave in the "Shanny Supports Griffin" thread.MT - I know no one here has put any stock into the statements I made before the draft (when Shanny drafted Bell) but I have to tell you that, from my point of view, Q will seldom have running room in this offense. He is simply not tall enough to see the elbow to wrist area of the Denver O-line's arms - which keeps him from catching the flow of the holes in this Denver scheme. The reason the Denver O-Line is so dominant is that they don't give any hints/clues to the guys they're blocking by "pointing" with their feet and legs. They drive off the line with arms and upper body more than with pure foot speed and leg positioning. It's why their counters/draws/other pull-blocks work so well. A RB has to be able to see over his linemen's shoulders in order to see what's going on. That's how Portis got his chest caved in. That's why their knees keep getting torn up. That's why Q might be a brilliant back somewhere else in the league, but will simply not cut it in Denver.Q had a great game against KC this year and a great game against Indy last year. Neither of those teams have D-lines physical enough against the run to require serious hole placement adjustments. Q didn't have to see what was going on to be able to hit the hole at full burst. Anyone else, he's going to disappoint.Q's a bust for this offense, but if he gets traded will probably be a Warrick Dunn kind of guy - very productive.

Feel free to refute this after this weekend.

 

[Cixelsyd]

Q is done. Stop kidding yourselves. 3 fumbles, 3 games.... the only thing keeping him in is Bell's injury. Bell is the answer. The idiots that wanted a response to Bell being hurt should be shot. The story speaks for itself... he got hurt... it's not a skill thing to get hurt... but it takes alot of skill (bad) to run like Bell did against SD. Kinda looked like Jim Everett. There has been alot of injuries this year... they happen, Bells is minor... which is bad news for Q. Q getting off on KC is like hooking up with a fat chick, it makes every other good that look that much harder... Q looked like he had stage fright against SD. Stick a fork in him... Q has 2 more weeks max...

 

[Peter]

but it takes alot of skill (bad) to run like Bell did against SD. Kinda looked like Jim Everett.

Here I thought you were FOR Bell...I'm not so sure Bell will get the job, but I HIGHLY doubt Q will keep it.

 

[Big Score]

IMO if he fails in the next 2 games they have to make a change. What I mean by that is assumming the O line is blocking (they usually do) if Griffin does not produce and/or puts the ball on the ground then I would make a change if I were the coach.

If Q keeps producing along the lines of his last two games and Shanny sticks with him for two more, Denver's season will be in serious jeporady. Considering there's only 16 games in an NFL season, Shanny can't stay with a fumble prone non producing back for a quarter of the season. If Griffin underwhelms this week or fumbles, he's done.

 

[CaptainHucklebuck]

MT - I know no one here has put any stock into the statements I made before the draft (when Shanny drafted Bell) but I have to tell you that, from my point of view, Q will seldom have running room in this offense. He is simply not tall enough to see the elbow to wrist area of the Denver O-line's arms - which keeps him from catching the flow of the holes in this Denver scheme. The reason the Denver O-Line is so dominant is that they don't give any hints/clues to the guys they're blocking by "pointing" with their feet and legs. They drive off the line with arms and upper body more than with pure foot speed and leg positioning. It's why their counters/draws/other pull-blocks work so well. A RB has to be able to see over his linemen's shoulders in order to see what's going on. That's how Portis got his chest caved in. That's why their knees keep getting torn up. That's why Q might be a brilliant back somewhere else in the league, but will simply not cut it in Denver.Q had a great game against KC this year and a great game against Indy last year. Neither of those teams have D-lines physical enough against the run to require serious hole placement adjustments. Q didn't have to see what was going on to be able to hit the hole at full burst. Anyone else, he's going to disappoint.

This is an argument that Q will not be able to find the holes, while another RB may be able to.But that is not what happened yesterday. There were no holes to find. Portis wouldn't have done much better. (Mike Anderson probably would have, because he can turn a 0 yard gain into a 1 yard gain by moving the pile a bit.)

Nope. This is an argument that the line and the back are not on the same page and neither knows what the other is going to do when things aren't going to happen exactly as they did on paper. Portis would have been reasonably fine. Droughns would have been okay. Etc... Etc...I'm not saying they'd've had 200 yards and a couple TDs, but they would have done much better. Honestly, I've been saying this all year - the Denver system needs a tall RB - 5'11" or higher. Like Hearst, Bell, or Droughns.Droughns: 5'11" and he's succeeding here where he had not succeeded in the NFL before. Proof enough?

 

[Marc Levin]

Droughns: 5'11" and he's succeeding here where he had not succeeded in the NFL before. Proof enough?

Droughns problem was a lack of opp, not a lack of production when given opp.Playing behind Mike Anderson and Clinton Portis when the team needs a pass catching and good blocking fullback (two roles Droughns filled VERY well over the last two years) had more to do with Droughns not getting a chance than a lack of skill.

 

[CaptainHucklebuck]

Droughns: 5'11" and he's succeeding here where he had not succeeded in the NFL before. Proof enough?

Droughns problem was a lack of opp, not a lack of production when given opp.Playing behind Mike Anderson and Clinton Portis when the team needs a pass catching and good blocking fullback (two roles Droughns filled VERY well over the last two years) had more to do with Droughns not getting a chance than a lack of skill.

Droughns averaged 2.4 yards per carry in DET. That's what I'm getting at.

 

[agent_77]

This isn't that complicated. Until further notice you have to assume Droughns is the starter and primary ball carrier here on out. If Shanahan turns his back on Droughns after what he did last week, then it just wasn't meant for us to figure out, so why waste time trying to guess what he's up to. Droughns all the way! until we hear otherwise. You'll kill yourself trying to figure this one out. I say if you own Droughns you're in great shape!

 

[JohnnyU]

Droughns: 5'11" and he's succeeding here where he had not succeeded in the NFL before.  Proof enough?

Droughns problem was a lack of opp, not a lack of production when given opp.Playing behind Mike Anderson and Clinton Portis when the team needs a pass catching and good blocking fullback (two roles Droughns filled VERY well over the last two years) had more to do with Droughns not getting a chance than a lack of skill.

Droughns averaged 2.4 yards per carry in DET. That's what I'm getting at.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't he hurt almost all the time at Detroit?

 

[CaptainHucklebuck]

Droughns: 5'11" and he's succeeding here where he had not succeeded in the NFL before. Proof enough?

Droughns problem was a lack of opp, not a lack of production when given opp.Playing behind Mike Anderson and Clinton Portis when the team needs a pass catching and good blocking fullback (two roles Droughns filled VERY well over the last two years) had more to do with Droughns not getting a chance than a lack of skill.

Droughns averaged 2.4 yards per carry in DET. That's what I'm getting at.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't he hurt almost all the time at Detroit?

Yes, which is why he didn't play more. Not why he didn't do well when he played.

 

[Slash]

I can't believe you guys are babbling about Droughn's ypc average in Detroit. That was years ago when Droughns wasn't as polished a player and when he was on a poor team. The only running back in the past decade who could do anything worthwhile in Detroit has been Barry Sanders (enough said). Anyways, you guys should put more relevance upon what Droughns did last Sunday rather than what he did 3-4 years ago, and last Sunday Droughns had a 6.0+ ypc average against a stout Carolina defense....and don't give me that bull that the Carolina defense is soft against the run. That's crap. Statistically, Carolina isn't doing so well against the run this year through ONLY 5 weeks of the season, but that defense is built to stop the run and is a Superbowl-caliber defense. Nothing you get against the Carolina defense comes free.

 

[CaptainHucklebuck]

I can't believe you guys are babling about Droughn's ypc average in Detroit. That was years ago when Droughns wasn't as polished and on a poor team. The only back in the past decade who could do anything worthwhile in Detroit has been Barry Sanders. Anyways, you guys should put more relevance upon what Droughns did last Sunday rather than what he did 3-4 years ago, and last Sunday Droughns had a 6.0 ypc average on a stout Carolina defense....and don't give me that bull that the Carolina defense is soft against the run. That's crap. Statistically, Carolina isn't doing so well against the run this year through only 5 weeks of the season, but that defense is built to stop the run and is a Superbowl-caliber defense. Nothing you get against the Carolina defense comes free.

Yes, that's sort of what I'm saying. In response to Maurile Tremblay's statement that there were just no holes for Griffin to run through, I pointed out that Droughns was just fine last Sunday - proof that the problem is Griffin - (and, in my own statements that've been around since before the draft, Griffin's height). Droughns is doing well because he's an NFL-caliber back behind a line built to spring him. Unlike in DET. And he can see where the holes will be. Unlike Griffin.

 

[mbuehner]

Doesnt anybody remember Griffin shredding a terrible defense in game 1? Look, if Droughs can get the job done against good rush defenses, god bless him. But my money says he goes back to the 2.x y/c against a pretty good Oakland D. Imo, consistancy is not going to be the hallmark of this run game no matter who is back there.

 

[Slash]

It's funny that I keep seeing people refer to the Carolina defense as a weak defense now. Just last year everyone considered the Carolina defense as one of the top defenses in the NFL, and it was as Carolina jumped on the defense's back all the way to the Superbowl. So in 8 short months the Carolina defense has gone from Superbowl-defense to poor NFL defense? Well then, I guess all you bashing the Carolina defense should also be pimping the San Diego offense as on the best offenses in the NFL, right?

 

[mbuehner]

So in 8 short months the Carolina defense has gone from Superbowl-defense to poor NFL defense?

Yes. Giving up 160 yards a game rushing is terrible.And good teams usuall arent 1-3.

 

[P Boy]

Look, if Droughs can get the job done against good rush defenses, god bless him. But my money says he goes back to the 2.x y/c against a pretty good Oakland D. Imo, consistancy is not going to be the hallmark of this run game no matter who is back there.

But that's because you are a Griffin excuse-maker who is wrong.

 

[mbuehner]

But that's because you are a Griffin excuse-maker who is wrong

Trying not to be. Maybe Droughns is the guy, maybe its Bell. Maybe its no-one, or a RBBC. I say RBBC.

 

[mrspree15]

It's funny that I keep seeing people refer to the Carolina defense as a weak defense now. Just last year everyone considered the Carolina defense as one of the top defenses in the NFL, and it was as Carolina jumped on the defense's back all the way to the Superbowl. So in 8 short months the Carolina defense has gone from Superbowl-defense to poor NFL defense? Well then, I guess all you bashing the Carolina defense should also be pimping the San Diego offense as on the best offenses in the NFL, right?

Welcome to the 2004 season. Remember that whole parity thing? Remember when the Rams weren't supposed to get to the Superbowl? Remember when the Patriots weren't supposed to beat the now powerful Rams in the Superbowl? Remember when the Panthers weren't supposed to come close to the now powerful Patriots in the Superbowl? Parity. It is quite reasonable in this era of the NFL to think that the Panthers went from Superbowl to bad team. And it is also reasonable to think that the Chargers went from horrible to kinda good.

 

[Slash]

Maybe its no-one, or a RBBC. I say RBBC.

Every game this year Shanahan has featured ONE back. He will continue to feature ONE back. Which one is the question? Don't mistake RB depth for a RBBC.

 

[Marc Levin]

Maybe its no-one, or a RBBC. I say RBBC.

Every game this year Shanahan has featured ONE back. He will continue to feature ONE back. Which one is the question? Don't mistake RB depth for a RBBC.

Plus, reported by Fanball from yesterday's press conference:

The NewsBroncos coach Mike Shanahan discussed his run game in Monday's press conference, again choosing to use generalities rather than specifics about how he will use running backs Quentin Griffin and Reuben Droughns. "Whoever is our starter would probably carry the ball 20-22 times a game, somewhere in that area," he said. "The guy that was backing him up might carry eight-to-10 times, somewhere in that area. I'm not saying who is going to start or who is going to be second team. I would never say, ‘We are going to do this in a two-back set, one-back set.' We may go in that direction, but you can never know for sure."

On Car.'s D, it has been a porous run defense so far this year. That said, in deciding why he did so well on Sunday, I think there is something to be said for Droughns' ability to see over his o-linemen, but there is equally as much to be said for his ability to fight off tacklers and power through those defenders arm tackling to strip the ball. At least that was how I saw it.