Shanahan Makes No Promises That Tatum Bell Will Remain The Starter (1 Viewer)

[packersfan]

Some very interesting quotes here:

On whether or not RB Tatum Bell will start again once he is healthy

“I have said this from day one and I say this to the players- that if you get injured and you are out for a length of time and somebody comes in and plays better than you then that person has the right to keep their job. You don’t have the right to keep your job because you are injured and you have a right to that job. If you get injured and somebody plays better than you, that just makes sense to me. I have always thought that. I am not sure who came up with that quote that if you are injured and somebody else comes in that you have the right to get that job back. If a person plays at the same level, or maybe one way or the other, then the other person may get their job back but if the other person out plays them then you have got to do what is in the best interest of the football team. We clear that up with the players before we start the season so that if somebody does get hurt and somebody beats that guy out they know.”

On if he feels that RB Mike Bell has played better than RB Tatum Bell

“We have a good situation because we understand that we have got a few guys that can play and it all depends. We have got Tatum that is all banged up and has two sore toes, Mike Bell is a little bit sore, and Cedric Cobbs is coming off of a bad ankle. So it always depends on during the week how these guys practice and the guys that practice good are going to play and we have got a few guys that we think are capable of playing and we will play the best players. Very similar to what happened with (FB) Kyle Johnson this week. He thought he could play, and he might have been able to, but he didn’t even have the power pushing off with a sore ankle and with blocking those big outside linebackers if you are not full speed then it is really hard to have a good game and they are going to get to you quickly and that is one of the reasons that we kept him out and hopefully he is ready to go this week.”

 

[Marc Levin]

If a person plays at the same level, or maybe one way or the other, then the other person may get their job back but if the other person out plays them then you have got to do what is in the best interest of the football team.

Hard to say whether MBell outplayed TBell - one game he did, one game he definitely did not.

 

[packersfan]

If a person plays at the same level, or maybe one way or the other, then the other person may get their job back but if the other person out plays them then you have got to do what is in the best interest of the football team.

Hard to say whether MBell outplayed TBell - one game he did, one game he definitely did not.

I didn't think Mike Bell looked very good against the Steelers. Yes they have a tough defense but I still thought he looked slow and sluggish and lacking explosiveness.That being said, if Shanahan was really committed to Tatum as his starter he'd say so. But this is the second straight week he's declined to shoot down a RB controversy by simply saying Tatum is his starter and the job is his when he returns. That would be very easy to do and it's what one would expect Shanahan to do if he truly believed in Tatum as his guy. But it's clear he doesn't - at least not entirely. It may simply be a result of the injuries but it's pretty clear that the door is wide open for Mike Bell. This week's matchup against the Raiders is a lot more inviting. If he has a good game against them he may keep the starting job and not look back.

 

[Gr00vus]

If a person plays at the same level, or maybe one way or the other, then the other person may get their job back but if the other person out plays them then you have got to do what is in the best interest of the football team.

Why that's clear as a bell.Here's a question for ya Mike - if the other person out plays the first person, how come you couldn't figure out that the other person was better than the first person and just, you know, let them be the guy from the start? Because otherwise it's just a temporal thing and you've got no assurance that the other guy will in fact be better than the first guy going forward right? Either that or maybe you're not evaluating your talent optimally at some point here. See I can use many words to say pretty much nothing too. Where's my presser?

 

[Brewzers]

If a person plays at the same level, or maybe one way or the other, then the other person may get their job back but if the other person out plays them then you have got to do what is in the best interest of the football team.

Hard to say whether MBell outplayed TBell - one game he did, one game he definitely did not.

I don't watch a whole lot of Bronco games. Is one Bell considered a better blocker?

 

[Marc Levin]

If a person plays at the same level, or maybe one way or the other, then the other person may get their job back but if the other person out plays them then you have got to do what is in the best interest of the football team.

Hard to say whether MBell outplayed TBell - one game he did, one game he definitely did not.

I don't watch a whole lot of Bronco games. Is one Bell considered a better blocker?

Yes - Tatum.He's actually really improved over the last two years and MBell has a lot ot learn about blitz pick-up

 

[Brewzers]

If a person plays at the same level, or maybe one way or the other, then the other person may get their job back but if the other person out plays them then you have got to do what is in the best interest of the football team.

Hard to say whether MBell outplayed TBell - one game he did, one game he definitely did not.

I didn't think Mike Bell looked very good against the Steelers. Yes they have a tough defense but I still thought he looked slow and sluggish and lacking explosiveness.That being said, if Shanahan was really committed to Tatum as his starter he'd say so. But this is the second straight week he's declined to shoot down a RB controversy by simply saying Tatum is his starter and the job is his when he returns. That would be very easy to do and it's what one would expect Shanahan to do if he truly believed in Tatum as his guy. But it's clear he doesn't - at least not entirely. It may simply be a result of the injuries but it's pretty clear that the door is wide open for Mike Bell. This week's matchup against the Raiders is a lot more inviting. If he has a good game against them he may keep the starting job and not look back.

I don't understand why Shanahan would play it any differently. He's the coach, he's got to motivate both Bells (and Cobbs). He even said the guys that practice good are going to play. If Tatum is better, he'll end up starting and probably get the majority of the carries. Until he is practicing as the best, rightfully, everyone else should be given a chance to win that job.

 

[packersfan]

If a person plays at the same level, or maybe one way or the other, then the other person may get their job back but if the other person out plays them then you have got to do what is in the best interest of the football team.

Hard to say whether MBell outplayed TBell - one game he did, one game he definitely did not.

I didn't think Mike Bell looked very good against the Steelers. Yes they have a tough defense but I still thought he looked slow and sluggish and lacking explosiveness.That being said, if Shanahan was really committed to Tatum as his starter he'd say so. But this is the second straight week he's declined to shoot down a RB controversy by simply saying Tatum is his starter and the job is his when he returns. That would be very easy to do and it's what one would expect Shanahan to do if he truly believed in Tatum as his guy. But it's clear he doesn't - at least not entirely. It may simply be a result of the injuries but it's pretty clear that the door is wide open for Mike Bell. This week's matchup against the Raiders is a lot more inviting. If he has a good game against them he may keep the starting job and not look back.

I don't understand why Shanahan would play it any differently. He's the coach, he's got to motivate both Bells (and Cobbs). He even said the guys that practice good are going to play. If Tatum is better, he'll end up starting and probably get the majority of the carries. Until he is practicing as the best, rightfully, everyone else should be given a chance to win that job.

I wouldn't necessarily disagree with that but I still believe if Shanahan truly was committed to Tatum as his starter he'd make that very clear. Hell, he's shown a lot of commitment to Plummer and he hasn't played well at all until lately. But Shanahan left no question who his starting QB was. But here for the second straight week he's declined to do the same with Tatum Bell. Given that Bell was leading the AFC in rushing prior to his injury it's not like he was playing poorly either. You could make a strong case he was the best offensive player the Broncos had prior to his injury. I don't deny the mindset of making players earn jobs but I think it was pretty clear that Tatum Bell had earned the starting job based on his performance. So I don't think it's unrealistic to think that a head coach who truly believed in him would make it clear who his guy is. But Shanahan has refused to do so here which leads me to speculate that he's not firmly committed to Bell. One could argue he has just cause given how Bell has yet to shake the durability issues that have dogged him. But if you're a Tatum Bell owner looking for something - maybe anything - positive to come out of this situation Shanahan has pretty much put the kibosh on that in my opinion.

 

[Da Guru]

Mike Bell looked slow and sluggish on Sunday.

Against Indy Mike went through those huge holes untouched. Any back can do that.

I think Tatum is the better overall back.

My feeling if both are healthy Tatum wil get a 70-30 share of the load. Not the whole thing like he was getting before.

 

[Marc Levin]

If we haven't figured it out yet, Shannie is DEFINITELY playing mind games with Tatum - has been all year long.

I think the statement was made b/c he doesn't want Tatum Bell to stop working hard to re-earn the start and he doesn't want Mike Bell to stop working to earn the start.

But, I don't think a healthy Tatum Bell will lose his starting role to a healthy Mike Bell. I highlighted it earlier, and I'll highlight it again:

If a person plays at the same level, or maybe one way or the other, then the other person may get their job back but if the other person out plays them then you have got to do what is in the best interest of the football team.

Ummm, what the heck does the italicized portion mean? What I',m reading into it is that Shannie means Mike Bell will win the start away from Tatum if he "clearly outplays him"Do any of us really see that happening when, during preseason, Mike Bell WAS clearly outplaying Tatum and Tatum ended up starting for the team in week one.

IMO, this litlle vague speech of his is a motivation ploy for both Bells - but mostly for Tatum b/c Tatum CLEARLY needs to know his job is not safe to start playing his best.

 

[Zigg]

When does Cobbs start?

 

[Marc Levin]

Ma 70-30 share of the load. Not the whole thing like he was getting before.

TBell wasn't getting the bulk even when he was getting the bulk - there were only a few games where TBell took the full load.I think 70-30 is the right split for TBell to get around 20-25 carries.

 

[PatsWillWin]

When does Cobbs start?

Veeerryy soon.

 

[johnnybronco]

If a person plays at the same level, or maybe one way or the other, then the other person may get their job back but if the other person out plays them then you have got to do what is in the best interest of the football team.

Hard to say whether MBell outplayed TBell - one game he did, one game he definitely did not.

I don't watch a whole lot of Bronco games. Is one Bell considered a better blocker?

Yes - Tatum.He's actually really improved over the last two years and MBell has a lot ot learn about blitz pick-up

way off on this one, Mike Bell's blocking for a rookie is very good, Tatum is fine at blocking too. For those that dont' watch Denver on a regular basis you have to understand that the QB being pressured more than normal is a common thing, that is directly a result of the smaller, quicker line. That is also the reason why a Denver QB has to be somewhat mobile. Not like a Donovan or Mike Vick, but like Plummer, like how Romo is now for Dallas.also, i've said it many times before and I'll say it again, Shanny does not have faith in Tatum. Their fears from the offseason have come true, TATUM CAN NOT HANDLE THE CARRIES. It's just that simple. If Mike lights it up next week, Tatum will get spot duty, 1 series for every 2 series Mike gets. If Mike ####s the bed, then we are looking at 60/40 for Tatum MAXIMUM. He just can't handle the load and said so already himself.

 

[Love to Bet football]

very simple.....A healthy Tatum Bell = Broncos starting RB just as he was b4 his injury.....so what Mike Bell had a big game vs the Colts,what do you think Tatum wouldve done vs Indy if he was healthy..........When Tatum was healthy Mike didnt even step on the field and we WILL see this again in the next 2-3 weeks

 

[johnnybronco]

very simple.....A healthy Tatum Bell = Broncos starting RB just as he was b4 his injury.....so what Mike Bell had a big game vs the Colts,what do you think Tatum wouldve done vs Indy if he was healthy..........When Tatum was healthy Mike didnt even step on the field and we WILL see this again in the next 2-3 weeks

if that's the case guys then pay a lot for Mike Bell cause once Tatum comes back, a full workload will put him on the injury list by week 14,15,16......just in time for fantasy playoffs add to that to assume that Tatum would do jsut as well as Mike against Indy is absurd. Mike's ability to see and make the one cut and take off is one of the reasons he took the job in preseason. He is the best RB in this system from a vision standpoint. If Mike had the 2nd gear, this wouldn't even be a contest, but unfortunately he doesn't and that's why he's an undrafted free agent. As much as it sounds that I don't like Tatum, I do. But i'm a bronco fan first, and Tatum just isn't effective after 15-18 carries. anything beyond that, you are risking injury to him eventually.

 

[Marc Levin]

way off on this one, Mike Bell's blocking for a rookie is very good, Tatum is fine at blocking too.

I'm just going off what I recall from the preseason - as a denver homer you'd be better equipped to tell me if he's improved since the late preseason, but I definitely recall that blitz pickup was one of the things that distinguished TBell from MBell in the early regular season games:

Bell said he has to improve, particularly at protecting the quarterback in blocking the blitz.

"It's very complicated and I have a long way to go," the Arizona product said. "This isn't college anymore. Guys are flying at you. I think I'm getting better at it. The plays are slowing down, but I still have to work every day on it."

Link

 

[delusional]

Shanny does not like Tatum.

I bet if Tatum was the leading rusher in the AFC before he got hurt, shanny would still say he could lose his job

 

[pinda]

way off on this one, Mike Bell's blocking for a rookie is very good, Tatum is fine at blocking too.

I'm just going off what I recall from the preseason - as a denver homer you'd be better equipped to tell me if he's improved since the late preseason, but I definitely recall that blitz pickup was one of the things that distinguished TBell from MBell in the early regular season games:

Bell said he has to improve, particularly at protecting the quarterback in blocking the blitz.

"It's very complicated and I have a long way to go," the Arizona product said. "This isn't college anymore. Guys are flying at you. I think I'm getting better at it. The plays are slowing down, but I still have to work every day on it."

Link

for a rookie RB, and as a broncos homer, i have no major issues with his blocking skills. that link is from august, if he hasn't improved by now, no way Shanny puts him in. Also, the minute a rookie comes out and says that he's fine with blocking and he's picked it all up, is the same minute he'd firmly position himself on the bench.only criticism I have for Mike Bell is wrecklessness. He sell out his body every run. Jumping over top of tacklers, spinning around like a top, and doing forward rolls when hitting the ground. He's going to get connected hard one of these days.

 

[SSOG]

If we haven't figured it out yet, Shannie is DEFINITELY playing mind games with Tatum - has been all year long.I think the statement was made b/c he doesn't want Tatum Bell to stop working hard to re-earn the start and he doesn't want Mike Bell to stop working to earn the start.

I disagree. I think this is directly a result of the dropoff in Tatum's play from last year to this year. Tatum's ypc has dropped from 5.3 to 4.5. Last year, he averaged a 20+ yard run once every 17 or so carries. This year, he's averaging one every 45 carries (less than a third as often). I don't think it's unreasonable to think that Mike Shanahan has been less than impressed with Tatum's short stint as a featured back, and might drastically scale back Tatum's load to help him recover some of that explosiveness that made him so valuable.Besides, Tatum still isn't a Denver-style RB. His success rate is still very low (45%, good for 28th in the league). Mike Bell's is currently 51%, 8th in the league. And most of Tatum's inconsistancies are still coming on 1st down, where it seems he either gets 12 yards or 0 yards but never 5. That was the same knock on him last year, too. Couple this with Shanahan's history regarding Rookies (i.e. he HATES playing them early in the season), and I'm not yet convinced that this is all just a PTMTB.In other words, despite the fact that Mike Shanahan crowned his ***, Tatum Bell is who we thought he is.

very simple.....A healthy Tatum Bell = Broncos starting RB just as he was b4 his injury.....so what Mike Bell had a big game vs the Colts,what do you think Tatum wouldve done vs Indy if he was healthy..........When Tatum was healthy Mike didnt even step on the field and we WILL see this again in the next 2-3 weeks

Tatum wouldn't have had the game that Mike Bell had. Tatum is more of an outside runner. Mike is more of an inside runner. Outside defense is the strength of the Colts, with their quick defenders, while interior run defense is their biggest defense. In other words, even if he was healthy, Tatum wouldn't have done as well as Mike did against Indy.

 

[SSOG]

Shanny does not like Tatum. I bet if Tatum was the leading rusher in the AFC before he got hurt, shanny would still say he could lose his job

Tatum *WAS* the leading rusher in the AFC before he got hurt.

 

[thatguy]

If a person plays at the same level, or maybe one way or the other, then the other person may get their job back but if the other person out plays them then you have got to do what is in the best interest of the football team.

Why that's clear as a bell.

Here's a question for ya Mike - if the other person out plays the first person, how come you couldn't figure out that the other person was better than the first person and just, you know, let them be the guy from the start? Because otherwise it's just a temporal thing and you've got no assurance that the other guy will in fact be better than the first guy going forward right? Either that or maybe you're not evaluating your talent optimally at some point here. See I can use many words to say pretty much nothing too. Where's my presser?

This happens all the time. Some players simply have the "it" factor to step it up when given the opportunity in real game action, and this ability is not always evident on the practice field. On the contrary, a lot of players are all stars on the practice field but seem to fold under pressure. I'm not saying anything particular about Tatum or Mike here, but just saying that "how come you couldn't figure out that the other person was better in the first place" is a silly question. It just doesn't always work that way. There are tons of examples of back up players who have filled in for injured players and gone on to be supertars.

 

[packersfan]

I don't think it's unreasonable to think that Mike Shanahan has been less than impressed with Tatum's short stint as a featured back

You seriously believe that? Tatum Bell was running the ball extremely well prior to his injury. He was leading the AFC in rushing and he fared well against good run defenses (Baltimore and New England come to mind). So what if he wasn't busting off huge runs; he was running with more power and assertiveness than he had ever displayed before in my opinion. Shanahan would have to be a complete idiot to have watched him play and be disappointed with his production. And Shanahan's no idiot.Now you can make a case that Tatum Bell can't handle the rigors of being a feature RB in the NFL. There's certainly plenty of evidence - especially right now - to support that point of view. And you could argue that Shanahan may not believe Tatum can handle 25+ carries a game or even 20-25 on a consistent basis. Those are both strong arguments.But I don't know how anyone could have watched Tatum Bell prior to the Colts' game and not be impressed with him. He was clearly the best RB on the team and was arguably the best offensive player they had at that time. And yes I'm a Tatum owner but honestly I don't know how anyone can say they were disappointed by what he was doing prior to his injury. I'd say that even if I didn't have a vested interest in the Denver RB situation.

 

[moleculo]

I don't think it's unreasonable to think that Mike Shanahan has been less than impressed with Tatum's short stint as a featured back

You seriously believe that? Tatum Bell was running the ball extremely well prior to his injury. He was leading the AFC in rushing and he fared well against good run defenses (Baltimore and New England come to mind). So what if he wasn't busting off huge runs; he was running with more power and assertiveness than he had ever displayed before in my opinion. Shanahan would have to be a complete idiot to have watched him play and be disappointed with his production. And Shanahan's no idiot.Now you can make a case that Tatum Bell can't handle the rigors of being a feature RB in the NFL. There's certainly plenty of evidence - especially right now - to support that point of view. And you could argue that Shanahan may not believe Tatum can handle 25+ carries a game or even 20-25 on a consistent basis. Those are both strong arguments.But I don't know how anyone could have watched Tatum Bell prior to the Colts' game and not be impressed with him. He was clearly the best RB on the team and was arguably the best offensive player they had at that time. And yes I'm a Tatum owner but honestly I don't know how anyone can say they were disappointed by what he was doing prior to his injury. I'd say that even if I didn't have a vested interest in the Denver RB situation.

I have not been impressed with Tatum this year, with the exception of the 3rd down run vs baltimore where he carried Ray Lewis. Outside of that play, Tatum has not been overly impressive. He may have led the AFC in rushing at one point, but he still goes down at first contact, drops passes, and makes poor reads in the running game.On the other hand, I think a healthy Tatum would have lit up Indy. With the holes that MBell had, TBell would have easily had multiple long scoring runs - once they are in the open field, I think TBell is superior due to his breakaway speed.I don't think either back would have done well against Pittsburgh, and I didn't expect either back to get anything going that week. Pittsburgh is as good as any team in the league at playing defense on the other side of the LOS - MBell was continually hit in the backfield and could never get it going. I doubt TBell could have done any better.As far as Denvers best offensive player - please stop saying it's TBell. The only reason Denver is 6-2 at this point is Javon Walker, and it's not up for debate.

 

[packersfan]

As far as Denvers best offensive player - please stop saying it's TBell. The only reason Denver is 6-2 at this point is Javon Walker, and it's not up for debate.

I said you could make an argument that he was the best offensive player at the time of his injury. I stand by that point. Walker has obviously been very good and he was out of this world this past week. But Tatum Bell was giving the Broncos a strong running game when that's all they had offensively due to Plummer's struggles. For him to lead the AFC in rushing when defenses were gearing up to stop him was impressive in my opinion. I'd say he was doing a pretty darn good job and was deserving of praise. And again, I'd say that even if I wasn't a Tatum Bell owner.

 

[Jedimaster21]

I read that Tatum actually hurt his toe in the third game of the season right after he took over the starting role. If he has had toe problems since that game, I'm sure that would affect his explosiveness and ability to make the big play. When I watched Tatum this year, he seemed to run a lot harder and get positive yardage more frequently than in the past. However, he did seem reluctant to run outside, and also seemed unable to outrun linebackers at times. I honestly think his toe injury has been affecting him since that game.

That being said, turf toe is a lingering injury, and he will most likely have to deal with it for the rest of the season. So...it will be really difficult to determine whether or not it is his injury that is causing these problems.

 

[Mungo Burrows]

Just a ploy to motivate mike bell?

 

[Two Deep]

very simple.....A healthy Tatum Bell = Broncos starting RB just as he was b4 his injury.....so what Mike Bell had a big game vs the Colts,what do you think Tatum wouldve done vs Indy if he was healthy..........When Tatum was healthy Mike didnt even step on the field and we WILL see this again in the next 2-3 weeks

The above statement should come with the disclaimer; "My comments are my own and in no way represent the thoughts or actions of the Denver Bronco's".