2016 Sanchez or Lynch is not 2015 PMF

[Broncos6482]

The premise of the thread was that Manning's bad QB play was never an issue in the locker room because of his reverence for the game and the man himself. Also his mind more than made up for his bad play. Tomlin quoted this in the playoff game and the DC in San Diego said after the last game that Denver ran a simple offense with Brock and that they never had to check out of a play on Defense because of the way Kubiak called the game. Once Manning came in, they had to make real-time adjustments. I'd expect a simple offense with Lynch and this will propagate to a simple defensive plan for the defenses against our offense.

His mind wasn't the same because he was running a new system that he wasn't familiar with. So whereas before he could pretty much run plays with his eyes closed, now he had to take a little extra time holding the ball because he wasn't always sure if someone was where he thought they would be. Combine that with his decreased physical skills and you get the results we saw from Manning and the offense last year.

The offense last year was probably simplified by the end of the season because it gets really difficult to switch things up during the year. So we start off running Kubiak's offense, but that's not working, so they switch to the bastardized, hybrid offense we saw. Then when we switched Manning for Brock the team went back to more of the Kubiak offense. Then when Manning came back it was back to the hybrid again, although it leaned more to Kubiak. Talk about a mess.

But really, the Kubiak offense isn't all that complicated (really, none of them are really that complex: it's more about fooling the defense, which you don't have to be complex to do). With the Kubiak offense, that means you run the stretch play over and over and over and get the defense used to seeing that, then you hit them over the top with a bootleg pass. It works because it looks just like the stretch play to the defense.

 

[randymon]

Ok, I`m confused. I thought the whole time I was saying......Denver needs the Qb position respected by the D in order for the run game to succeed in order for them to accomplish what I have to believe is on Elway and company`s agenda. ....a trip back to SB. Pretty sure I`ve stuck with that notion the entire time. You stated they could do it with "subpar" Qb. To me a "subpar Qb" wouldn`t earn a D`s respect ,thus the run game would suffer and so would making playoffs or going deep in them. You said that doesn`t matter. I disagreed. That pretty much some it up? You say I was flip flopping all over the place? Show me?

 

[randymon]

7-9. Does that negate the fact that they had a great running game with terrible qb play?

I quit

 

[cdumler7]

Ok, I`m confused. I thought the whole time I was saying......Denver needs the Qb position respected by the D in order for the run game to succeed in order for them to accomplish what I have to believe is on Elway and company`s agenda. ....a trip back to SB. Pretty sure I`ve stuck with that notion the entire time. You stated they could do it with "subpar" Qb. To me a "subpar Qb" wouldn`t earn a D`s respect ,thus the run game would suffer and so would making playoffs or going deep in them. You said that doesn`t matter. I disagreed. That pretty much some it up? You say I was flip flopping all over the place? Show me?

No I said you are taking on 2 different arguments here but flipping between the two to make a point.

The first was that we can't run the football without a defense respecting the QB position. I said that is just not true. Teams like the Vikings and Rams have found success in the run game even without even average QB play. So yes the Broncos can run the football even with subpar QB play. Now yes a QB that is respected even just a little does help the run game. So I am hoping that is what we get this year but to me no matter what if we are to repeat it comes down more to how our run game performs combined with an elite defense than if we have great QB play or not.

Now yes obviously Super Bowl is our end goal as a team and yes at least average QB play would help tremdendously in boosting our chances. What I am saying is that there are other ways for a team to win even with subpar QB play. Plenty of teams in the past have done just that. Now if we get subpar QB play this year that doesn't mean we will win it. In fact yes it does make our chances go down. You want production from every position every year. Just have to see how that shakes out.

 

[randymon]

No I said you are taking on 2 different arguments here but flipping between the two to make a point.

The first was that we can't run the football without a defense respecting the QB position. I said that is just not true. Teams like the Vikings and Rams have found success in the run game even without even average QB play. So yes the Broncos can run the football even with subpar QB play. Now yes a QB that is respected even just a little does help the run game. So I am hoping that is what we get this year but to me no matter what if we are to repeat it comes down more to how our run game performs combined with an elite defense than if we have great QB play or not.

Now yes obviously Super Bowl is our end goal as a team and yes at least average QB play would help tremdendously in boosting our chances. What I am saying is that there are other ways for a team to win even with subpar QB play. Plenty of teams in the past have done just that. Now if we get subpar QB play this year that doesn't mean we will win it. In fact yes it does make our chances go down. You want production from every position every year. Just have to see how that shakes out.

I rest my case.

 

[cdumler7]

I rest my case.

You rest your case? So me saying the better QB play we get the better our chances and that proves your point? That to me is a "No Duh" kind of statement. Of course better QB play increases any teams chances. What I am saying is that teams have won the Super Bowl with below average talent at the QB position. Heck we did it last year. The Ravens and Bucs of the early 2000's. Heck the Giants with Eli Manning playing below average won the Super Bowl. There are many different ways to accomplish winning the Super Bowl. The QB is not the end all be all is all I am saying.

 

[Mingo]

The found the argument between CD and Randymon entertaining - and we are only in OTAs.

 

[CEH]

Kubiak may be in the 2nd year of the offense but a lot of the key players that need to execute the offense are brand new to the system including the QB as well as ~80% of the Oline just like last year. If Lynch beats out Sanchez I expect a very vanilla offense just like last year. It's not a given that the offense will be better . We all assume it will be and hope it will be. I know Baltimore in 2001 thought all they needed to do was upgrade the QB play and that didn't go as planned. Lewis getting hurt did not help.

 

[WalkerBoh]

Kubiak may be in the 2nd year of the offense but a lot of the key players that need to execute the offense are brand new to the system including the QB as well as ~80% of the Oline just like last year. If Lynch beats out Sanchez I expect a very vanilla offense just like last year. It's not a given that the offense will be better . We all assume it will be and hope it will be. I know Baltimore in 2001 thought all they needed to do was upgrade the QB play and that didn't go as planned. Lewis getting hurt did not help.

Why would you expect a "vanilla" offense? If Lynch beats out Sanchez, it will also be because he is able to tackle the bulk of the plays Kubiak wants to run. It doesn't take two years just to learn it. Flacco didn't take that long to excel in it.

 

[SpringStein]

Why would you expect a "vanilla" offense? If Lynch beats out Sanchez, it will also be because he is able to tackle the bulk of the plays Kubiak wants to run. It doesn't take two years just to learn it. Flacco didn't take that long to excel in it.

I think that comparing Flacco's situation, with several years starting in the NFL, to a rookie coming into a league probably isn't the best comparison to make.

I do think that questions on the OL abound.

 

[WalkerBoh]

I think that comparing Flacco's situation, with several years starting in the NFL, to a rookie coming into a league probably isn't the best comparison to make.

I do think that questions on the OL abound.

Why not? Just because Lynch is a rookie doesn't really make much difference. They both have the same amount of time to absorb the same amount of information. And again, all this is assuming Lynch wins the job. If that happens, it will mean he is ready in the coaches' eyes to run the whole offense. This wouldn't be a case of bringing in a backup mid season.

The O-line questions are valid. However, based on what has happened so far I'd say it's a good bet they will be better than last year.

 

[Broncos6482]

Is it possible that the o-line, qb, and entire offense are as bad or worse than last year? Sure, anything is possible.

However, I'd say it's unlikely. Sanchez has never been as bad as Manning was last year, the offensive line has more depth, and the offense can actually run the plays that Kubiak wants to run. All of those things point to the offense being better than last year.

No one is expecting 2013 levels of offensive production from the Broncos, but I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the Broncos can improve from one of the worst offenses in the league last year to a middle of the pack offense this year. And with our defense, even if they take a step back from last season, that still should be good enough for the Broncos to compete for the division and home field advantage.

 

[CEH]

I think that comparing Flacco's situation, with several years starting in the NFL, to a rookie coming into a league probably isn't the best comparison to make.

I do think that questions on the OL abound.

I agree George.

 

[CEH]

Why would you expect a "vanilla" offense? If Lynch beats out Sanchez, it will also be because he is able to tackle the bulk of the plays Kubiak wants to run. It doesn't take two years just to learn it. Flacco didn't take that long to excel in it.

Flacco in 2012 had one of the best post season ever in NFL history and won a Super Bowl. Big big difference between Flacco and a rookie from Memphis who has never called his own plays and never played under center.

To me, Matt Shaub would be a better example. A non starter like Brock until he started in Kubiaks offense.

2007 first year starting in Kubes offense
192 289 66.4 2241 9 TD 9 INT.

2008
251 380 66.1 3043 15 TD 10 INT

If Lynch has TDs >= INTs that would be a good first year.

 

[WalkerBoh]

Flacco in 2012 had one of the best post season ever in NFL history and won a Super Bowl. Big big difference between Flacco and a rookie from Memphis who has never called his own plays and never played under center.

To me, Matt Shaub would be a better example. A non starter like Brock until he started in Kubiaks offense.

2007 first year starting in Kubes offense
192 289 66.4 2241 9 TD 9 INT.

2008
251 380 66.1 3043 15 TD 10 INT

If Lynch has TDs >= INTs that would be a good first year.

Now this is a different argument. And I agree that Lynch could have a first season that's just "okay", should he win the job. He even could be awful. But that is a lot different from expecting a vanilla offense.

 

[randymon]

Ok. I have to be real careful here.... If Lynch were to start, I don't think it is a reach at all for most to " expect " a certain degree of Vanilla-ism just based on Lynchs " readiness " AT THIS POINT. Now if during preseason he looks to be grasping things quite well in Kubes system and not a watered down one, then I think the expectations could gain more strength as to his ability to run Kubes offense. As of this moment, you would have to assume he would need a couple of scoops of vanilla.

 

[WalkerBoh]

Logically speaking, if Lynch still needs a "vanilla" offense by the time the regular season starts, Sanchez will probably be the starter.

 

[CEH]

As we sit right now, What is the difference between Brock and Lynch? Considering we have not seen Lynch do anything, my starting point (and a realistic expectation) for a Lynch led offense is the 2015 Brock offense which was vanilla. Hey if we get a Russel Wilson type year out of Lynch awesome but that is normally not the norm for a rookie QB. I'm more of the mind set that what Kubiak did last year with Brock would be the route Denver takes with Lynch knowing that rookie QBs and turnovers are almost a synonymous term.

 

[SpringStein]

I have a question: What's wrong with vanilla?? It's one of the best flavor in the world!

 

[Mingo]

I have a question: What's wrong with vanilla?? It's one of the best flavor in the world!

It just reminds you of the top of your head.