Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fire Pat Shurmur

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • jazzy22jeff
    replied
    This is really a debate? Should have been gone three weeks ago.

    Leave a comment:


  • BroncoStampede
    replied
    At this point I'm like, meh. Shurmur is just about average in my opinion. He's working with a project QB whos played pretty bad overall this year, so I'm not sure what we should expect.

    Im really indifferent about whether he stays or goes.

    Leave a comment:


  • $Broncos$
    replied
    Im starting to think mcdaniels bubble screens were brilliant. This offense is pathetic. I know we’re injured but something need to happen. I say one year more with the staff let the dice fall where they may.

    Leave a comment:


  • HDbroncos02
    replied
    Originally posted by DENVERSB50CHAMP View Post
    Once Again Another Horrendously Offensive Performance. Pat Needs To Be Axed For This Putrid Offense. After Tonight’s Game I Better Be Reading Headlines of His Firing At This Point I Think Vic and Tom needs to be packing their bags 💼 after this game. Heads Need To Roll.
    Where were you last week, buddy?

    Leave a comment:


  • DENVERSB50CHAMP
    replied
    Once Again Another Horrendously Offensive Performance. Pat Needs To Be Axed For This Putrid Offense. After Tonight’s Game I Better Be Reading Headlines of His Firing At This Point I Think Vic and Tom needs to be packing their bags 💼 after this game. Heads Need To Roll.

    Leave a comment:


  • RocketArm006
    replied
    Originally posted by Dotst View Post
    I'm not sure why it took so long to start throwing screens. We didn't ever even attempt one so how would they know how well it would work?

    We will see this Saturday if the panthers game was a fluke or if the offense has turned a corner
    I kind of think they (especially Shurmur) started turning the corner in the Dolphin’s game. It was pretty much the first game that he went with a ball control offense and more TEs. Then we had the no QBs game and the Chiefs, which were setbacks, but a little understandable considering the circumstances.

    I too am very interested to see how this offense fairs against the Bills. It will definitely add to my optimism if they put together a good performance.

    On the other hand, if they look inept and lost, then it will be a blow to my personal confidence in this offense.

    We shall see. I’m hoping for the best, of course.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dotst
    replied
    I'm not sure why it took so long to start throwing screens. We didn't ever even attempt one so how would they know how well it would work?

    We will see this Saturday if the panthers game was a fluke or if the offense has turned a corner

    Leave a comment:


  • RocketArm006
    replied
    Originally posted by beastlyskronk View Post

    This was probably his best called game of the season. Probably the only complaint I really have would be turning to Lindsay late in the game, I get that he’s never fumbled but Gordon is the hot hand right now. Another minor thing but I thought it was great, was that Freeman was being used more in pass protection. Lindsay is all heart but that won’t get it done all the time when he has rushers with a head full of steam coming at him.

    They also hit Hamilton off of play action. Wasn’t a spectacular play or anything but the personnel grouping was definitely our running personnel, I believe it was Patrick, Hamilton, Vannett, and Fumagalli. With how often Hamilton and Patrick end up blocking in line in this offense I thought that was a tremendous tendency breaker.
    Agreed on all points. I love me some Lindsay, but the 1st down Lindsay up the middle play isn’t really working. Gordon has come on as of late, for sure. Finding a good balance between those 2 would help as well.

    Love seeing more TEs getting involved. I like what he’s done in the passed several games. I hope they continue to build on this.

    Leave a comment:


  • beastlyskronk
    replied
    Originally posted by RocketArm006 View Post
    I’m turning a corner on Shurmur. He’s changed up the offense to a shorter, ball control style with more TEs, screens, and rushing. It is helping the team stay in games. I also think he and Lock are starting to show signs of clicking. We’ll see how the rest of the season plays out, but if they string together several similar performances, I’ll be very encouraged.
    This was probably his best called game of the season. Probably the only complaint I really have would be turning to Lindsay late in the game, I get that he’s never fumbled but Gordon is the hot hand right now. Another minor thing but I thought it was great, was that Freeman was being used more in pass protection. Lindsay is all heart but that won’t get it done all the time when he has rushers with a head full of steam coming at him.

    They also hit Hamilton off of play action. Wasn’t a spectacular play or anything but the personnel grouping was definitely our running personnel, I believe it was Patrick, Hamilton, Vannett, and Fumagalli. With how often Hamilton and Patrick end up blocking in line in this offense I thought that was a tremendous tendency breaker.

    Leave a comment:


  • RocketArm006
    replied
    I’m turning a corner on Shurmur. He’s changed up the offense to a shorter, ball control style with more TEs, screens, and rushing. It is helping the team stay in games. I also think he and Lock are starting to show signs of clicking. We’ll see how the rest of the season plays out, but if they string together several similar performances, I’ll be very encouraged.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rastic
    replied
    Originally posted by neutessa View Post

    Here is an example more to my point - an explanation of how Shurmur's vertical desire could be hindering Lock. You point out Lock took the easy shots last year. Likely that was in part the design of the offense - more specifically the order of progressions (noted in the video).

    Again, I'm not totally excusing Lock. He needs to learn to come off that first read when it isn't there, but I don't agree that the coaching can't be better to help a young QB avoid "making these questionable decisions and missing open reads."

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sJN...tTOEi&index=29
    Those are such great videos that break down issues on the line that are easily contributing to problems.

    Interesting comparison of Scangarello and Shurmur. Scangs had issues, no question. Fangio hated his ultra conservative play calling which was likely a product of inexperience. For all that though, I wonder of Scangs was a better fit for Lock because of a simpler and more conservative style.

    Regardless, if Lock is ever going to succeed he needs to grow on the mental side of the game. He needs to learn to identify what is happening at the LOS to better recognize where pressure is coming from.

    You need a good QB to win but the game is still won and lost at the LOS.

    Leave a comment:


  • neutessa
    replied
    Originally posted by HDbroncos02 View Post
    Easy answer. Lock has stayed the same (or even regressed).

    What’s funny is that Lock was the complete opposite last year. He hardly took deep shots and was among the league-low in yards per attempt. Lock played quite conservative and was taking those open guys underneath or in the short game. Scangarello put him in PA a lot, where he thrived and is thriving now with Shurmur too. Basically, to have success with Lock is to make sure his first read is always open. That’s not sustainable in the NFL.

    Shurmur’s scheme is beautiful when it works. You’re right, there’s a lot more vertical concepts and it’s a bit more complex to the point where it may require the QB to go through progressions. But here’s the thing, Shurmur doesn’t leave Lock out to dry. There’s been multiple times where Lock has passed up on the open outlet passes (or even stared them down from the snap). Where there are receivers going vertical, there’s been Fant coming across the field open for an easy first down but doesn’t get the ball.

    But let’s be real here. Shurmur isn’t the one throwing the ball. He’s adjusted and tailored the offense to Lock’s strengths and limitations. At the end of the day, it’s still Lock making these questionable decisions and missing open reads. Would you blame Kubiak/McCoy for Lynch being a bust? Maybe slightly, but still you wouldn’t. We have a significant sample size to make judgments on Lock now. He’s had more chances than Lynch by now, too.

    https://twitter.com/masedenver/statu...622596609?s=21

    Not good company to be in looking at this tweet.
    Here is an example more to my point - an explanation of how Shurmur's vertical desire could be hindering Lock. You point out Lock took the easy shots last year. Likely that was in part the design of the offense - more specifically the order of progressions (noted in the video).

    Again, I'm not totally excusing Lock. He needs to learn to come off that first read when it isn't there, but I don't agree that the coaching can't be better to help a young QB avoid "making these questionable decisions and missing open reads."

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sJN...tTOEi&index=29

    Leave a comment:


  • Hadez
    replied
    Originally posted by InsaneBlaze23 View Post

    That last part, I'd rather see in these last few games. Mostly because if Rypien goes in and looks decent or better that tells fans that the coaching isn't the problem, and tells coaching Lock is the problem. Even if Brett goes out there, goes 2-2 in the last 4, if he looks like the offense is performing better, scoring, getting first down, more dynamic. It's a clear sign of who our QB shouldn't be.

    As well you mentioned we aren't doing anything in short yard gains. Not throwing short passes often, not running screens, etc. That could be because the coaches see in practice that Lock isn't effective in those situations. Be it he puts too much on the pass and wide outs can't catch it or he's under throwing to compensate for how much power he puts on passes. We saw that against KC when he under threw Hamler on 3rd & 7, but Hamler was able to use his skill to get the first. He also under threw Noah but Noah reached back to catch it.

    Side note, rewatched some clips from the Chiefs game, one of the few positive yardage players Lindsay had...was a counter run out the shotgun. So it's not like Shurmur doesn't wanna run those with him....just not doing it enough or at least evening out how often we run that vs just running him up the middle.
    On the flip side there were some plays where Gordon had success up the middle...but the noticeable things are those times Melvin hit the middle, there was holes made. So either the OL protected better on plays Gordon was in, or Gordon see's open holes better than Lindsay, or Chiefs defense just derped on plays where Gordon ran up the middle.
    From what I have seen of the QBs on our roster so far Rypien will have the most success right now. Problem is once there is enough game film on Rypien defenses will play short routes and run game. In the 80s/90s Rypien could have made it work but right now he would need an epic defense to make a deep playoff run. If we could combine Rypien's brain with Lock's arm we probably would need to start worrying about the huge QB contract.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hadez
    replied
    Originally posted by Bootleg View Post

    On the first INT he had Nick Vannett open underneath for what likely would have been a solid gain. At worst it would have set up a 3rd and short in FG range. On the 2nd INT, Tim Patrick was open for what would have been a first down. I'm all for taking shots down the field, but there's a time and place for doing so. Throwing into double/triple coverage rarely works out.

    Either he's not seeing them, or he's seeing them and still taking the riskier throws.


    Agreed

    The difference in your last statement imo is whether we need to replace the QB....the offensive coaching...or maybe both.

    Leave a comment:


  • InsaneBlaze23
    replied
    Originally posted by Bootleg View Post

    On the first INT he had Nick Vannett open underneath for what likely would have been a solid gain. At worst it would have set up a 3rd and short in FG range. On the 2nd INT, Tim Patrick was open for what would have been a first down. I'm all for taking shots down the field, but there's a time and place for doing so. Throwing into double/triple coverage rarely works out.

    Either he's not seeing them, or he's seeing them and still taking the riskier throws.


    That first pick, he also could have just ran for 3-4yrds and again be 3rd and short.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X