Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Drew Lock Thread

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

  • skeeter01
    replied
    Did you see the THREE's he was droppin ? Nuthin but net
    https://twitter.com/i/status/1405602216296157186

    Last edited by skeeter01; Yesterday, 07:20 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • jazzbodog
    replied
    Originally posted by atwaterandstir View Post
    Nice to hear some positive things coming out about Lock at mini camp.
    We need to remember that competition can and often does bring the best out of you. Unfortunately up to this point Drew Lock hasn't had to compete for much of anything. He was a local kid signed to start at Mizzou and his entire time in the NFL has been essentially given to him without beating anyone out.

    We may see a totally different QB in Lock now that there is actually something on the line. Up until right now his bad decisions and habits went unchecked with no threat of any consequence...I can't really blame him for not "changing". What he was doing got him four years starting at Mizzou and a starting gig in the NFL.

    Now that Teddy is a real threat, Lock may just tap into another gear he hasn't been made to reach. One thing is for certain though, the pressure to improve is absolutely much greater than ever before. It's go time now
    Good post but I think Lock had already realized before the Bridgewater acquisition that he needed to up his game significantly, aka "see the light" and raise the bar on his quarterback skills or face a short NFL career which could still happen. I hope he shows everyone he's got what it takes to be a leader / winner....BIG TIME!

    Leave a comment:


  • atwaterandstir
    replied
    Nice to hear some positive things coming out about Lock at mini camp.
    We need to remember that competition can and often does bring the best out of you. Unfortunately up to this point Drew Lock hasn't had to compete for much of anything. He was a local kid signed to start at Mizzou and his entire time in the NFL has been essentially given to him without beating anyone out.

    We may see a totally different QB in Lock now that there is actually something on the line. Up until right now his bad decisions and habits went unchecked with no threat of any consequence...I can't really blame him for not "changing". What he was doing got him four years starting at Mizzou and a starting gig in the NFL.

    Now that Teddy is a real threat, Lock may just tap into another gear he hasn't been made to reach. One thing is for certain though, the pressure to improve is absolutely much greater than ever before. It's go time now

    Leave a comment:


  • BroncoFanDK
    replied
    Remember when all the positive reports of how fantastic Orton was in training camp were circulating?
    Lock has the ability - lets see if he has the mentality and maturity. We are supposed to have one of NFL's best teams except for QB, so there is a golden opportunity to step up, but dominating at training is not that important.
    Lock (or Bridgewater) needs to step up in games so we can get some Mile High Magic - it is sorely missing!

    Leave a comment:


  • skeeter01
    replied
    Report: Drew Lock 'Dominated' Day 1 of Broncos' Minicamp | Yardbarker

    Something positive

    Leave a comment:


  • listopencil
    replied
    Originally posted by samparnell View Post

    Think I can visualize what you are describing. Have Seen Gus Malzahn use that formation and believe I saw UNM use it some when Bob DeBesse was OC.
    You've got the QB behind Center fairly close to the LOS. Two RB's are lined up to either side of and slightly behind him. A third RB is lined up directly behind the QB but farther away from the LOS than the other two. So 1QB, 2HB, 1FB. And then 2 WR split out fairly wide (one on each side of the LOS) to spread the D and forced the opposing secondary to commit certain defenders to run or pass making it easier for the QB to read. Typically your QB and FB in this are going to be a couple of your fastest kids on the team. Your HB's are going to be good blockers. But any of the four can end up carrying the ball and your QB can still throw it if the D tries to fill every gap.

    Leave a comment:


  • Barry1
    replied
    What I'm looking for Lock to improve on is his pre snap reads. I think that accuracy and footwork should be improved on his offseason workouts

    Leave a comment:


  • samparnell
    replied
    Originally posted by listopencil View Post

    All four of my kids played Pop Warner football and the most successful of their teams used a 'QB' and three RB's. Sort of a diamond formation. It was incredibly effective and very versatile. Fun to watch.
    Think I can visualize what you are describing. Have Seen Gus Malzahn use that formation and believe I saw UNM use it some when Bob DeBesse was OC.

    Leave a comment:


  • listopencil
    replied
    Originally posted by samparnell View Post

    Three Backs besides the QB and one or two Tight Ends would be Single Wing, Wing-T and, as you say, Wishbone. In high school football in NM, saw all of those run as base offenses by some of our opponents in the mid to late Nineties and into the early years of this century. Wing-T was especially common. We had a goalline package of plays from the Full/Stack I, so throw that one in as a special. One of our opponents used Full House T Formation as a GL special as well. The Yale Formation was discussed from time to time in our staff and at some coaching clinics, but can't recall seeing it run. It would be an effective GL special, too, IMO.

    Gus Malzahn probably has some three RB formations in his playbook. Air Force still runs some Bone, and UNM ran Triple Option from 2012 through about 2017, or so, with some formations having three Backs besides the QB.

    Tim Tebow was born at the wrong era of football. He would have made a great Single Wing Fullback or Halfback in which each of the four Backs were Running, Passing, Receiving and drop-kicking threats.
    All four of my kids played Pop Warner football and the most successful of their teams used a 'QB' and three RB's. Sort of a diamond formation. It was incredibly effective and very versatile. Fun to watch.

    Leave a comment:


  • jazzbodog
    replied
    Originally posted by Capt. Jack View Post
    I am starting to look forward to the season. Wouldn't it be great if Lock had a breakout season this year?

    Really? Just now starting to looking forward to the season. What was the apprehension? I won't guess here but I have a couple of thoughts as to why.

    I've been ready for it to start since Feb or so based on threads / posts. So much new Bronco dynamics to consider.
    I'm thinking Lock will definitely have a breakout season.

    Leave a comment:


  • Capt. Jack
    replied
    I am starting to look forward to the season. Wouldn't it be great if Lock had a breakout season this year?

    Leave a comment:


  • samparnell
    replied
    Originally posted by Hadez View Post

    Thank you for the break down.

    When was the last time you saw 31 or 32? When I first got into watching the Colorado Buffs I believe they were running the wishbone and would use that. Would not be too fun if they fell too far behind but was kind of fun to watch when the game was close.

    Was wondering if the Broncos would have gone to something like that if PM did not come along. Tebow with 3 Rbs or would we have had to consider Tebow a RB/TE? 3*/1
    Three Backs besides the QB and one or two Tight Ends would be Single Wing, Wing-T and, as you say, Wishbone. In high school football in NM, saw all of those run as base offenses by some of our opponents in the mid to late Nineties and into the early years of this century. Wing-T was especially common. We had a goalline package of plays from the Full/Stack I, so throw that one in as a special. One of our opponents used Full House T Formation as a GL special as well. The Yale Formation was discussed from time to time in our staff and at some coaching clinics, but can't recall seeing it run. It would be an effective GL special, too, IMO.

    Gus Malzahn probably has some three RB formations in his playbook. Air Force still runs some Bone, and UNM ran Triple Option from 2012 through about 2017, or so, with some formations having three Backs besides the QB.

    Tim Tebow was born at the wrong era of football. He would have made a great Single Wing Fullback or Halfback in which each of the four Backs were Running, Passing, Receiving and drop-kicking threats.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hadez
    replied
    Originally posted by samparnell View Post

    The side with the ball must have seven on LOS and only the two Ends are eligible. The five in between are ineligible and must wear the only ineligible numbers (#50-#79)

    Four players line up off LOS in the backfield and are eligible, but the personnel number doesn't count the QB, so there are three.

    So, there are five eligible receivers/ball carriers not counting the QB. Since the first number designates how many Backs and the second number designates how many Tight Ends, subtract the total of those from five and it tells you how many WRs are in that personnel package (e.g., 11 personnel = 3 WRs; 21, 12 and 03 personnel = 2 WRs; 10 and 01 personnel = 4 WRs; 00 personnel = 5 WRs; 13 personnel = 1 WR; and, 23 personnel = 0 WRs)

    If a sixth O-Lineman is sent onto the field, he must report as eligible because he will be eligible regardless of where he lines up and he is wearing an ineligible number. A sixth O-Lineman would most likely be counted as a TE, and wouldn't cause a problem, if he lined up in the backlfield, because D aligns to the formation.

    All of this is of interest mostly to defensive coaches who have at least one spotter in the box to report the personnel package that the offense is sending in. Based on scouting, DCs have predetermined defensive personnel (e.g., base, nickel, dime, GL) to be sent in response.
    Thank you for the break down.

    When was the last time you saw 31 or 32? When I first got into watching the Colorado Buffs I believe they were running the wishbone and would use that. Would not be too fun if they fell too far behind but was kind of fun to watch when the game was close.

    Was wondering if the Broncos would have gone to something like that if PM did not come along. Tebow with 3 Rbs or would we have had to consider Tebow a RB/TE? 3*/1

    Leave a comment:


  • RockWarrior84
    replied
    Originally posted by FR Tim View Post

    Let him work on average this this year, next year we can move to MVP.

    On the discussion of predicted stats. Bleacher Report has an article predicting all the QBs for this year.

    Lock- (projected not to play all the games) 3000 yds/ 17 TDs/ 10 int
    Bridgewater- 1500 yds/ 10tds/ 4 ints.

    Pretty average numbers overall, but getting 4500 yds / 27tds/ 14 ints would be a definite upgrade at the QB position.

    Not perfect, but I’ll take it.
    PFF has him as a breakout player too for this season.

    Leave a comment:


  • samparnell
    replied
    Originally posted by Hadez View Post

    Do they leave WRs out because it is assumed?

    If a OL lines up as a TE is that just added to the TE number?
    The side with the ball must have seven on LOS and only the two Ends are eligible. The five in between are ineligible and must wear the only ineligible numbers (#50-#79)

    Four players line up off LOS in the backfield and are eligible, but the personnel number doesn't count the QB, so there are three.

    So, there are five eligible receivers/ball carriers not counting the QB. Since the first number designates how many Backs and the second number designates how many Tight Ends, subtract the total of those from five and it tells you how many WRs are in that personnel package (e.g., 11 personnel = 3 WRs; 21, 12 and 03 personnel = 2 WRs; 10 and 01 personnel = 4 WRs; 00 personnel = 5 WRs; 13 personnel = 1 WR; and, 23 personnel = 0 WRs)

    If a sixth O-Lineman is sent onto the field, he must report as eligible because he will be eligible regardless of where he lines up and he is wearing an ineligible number. A sixth O-Lineman would most likely be counted as a TE, and wouldn't cause a problem, if he lined up in the backlfield, because D aligns to the formation.

    All of this is of interest mostly to defensive coaches who have at least one spotter in the box to report the personnel package that the offense is sending in. Based on scouting, DCs have predetermined defensive personnel (e.g., base, nickel, dime, GL) to be sent in response.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X