Skip to main content

Denver Broncos preview

I kind of wanted to wait to preview the Broncos, but it’s time to finish my AFC West series.

The Broncos’ offseason was marked by the departure of three important figures. Offensive coordinator Gary Kubiak left to become the head coach of the Houston Texans, where he’ll coach Mario Williams, the best defensive prospect in years…not. Longtime one-man pass rush Trevor Pryce and ace back Mike Anderson were let go in a bizarre salary cap measure right before the new labor deal was approved.

Yet each move makes at least some sense. With Kubiak, it’s not like the Broncos wanted him to leave, but they won’t miss him that much, either. If Rick Dennison can’t pick up the slack, Mike Shanahan surely can. Trevor Pryce once had amazing quickness for a defensive lineman, but injuries have led to two straight disappointing years. (Too bad, ’cause he’s a stud.) And Anderson rushed for more than a thousand yards…but he’s a running back, and he turns 33 next month.

The splashy move was the trade for first-round quarterback Jay Cutler. If one more person tells me Cutler should be starting this year, I am going to flip. Everyone I’ve talked to in person says he should start. And I guess, in theory, I’m fine with that-if he actually beats out Jake Plummer.

Plummer’s tremendous fourth-quarter comeback skills have vanished mysteriously, but he’s one of the best quarterbacks in the league. Yes, psychologists are baffled by his decision-making process, but do you really think a rookie will do better? Especially a rookie you hadn’t heard of six months ago?

It’s good to have someone who can, theoretically, push Plummer for the starting spot, but the Broncos hosted the conference championship last year. They were two wins from another Super Bowl trophy. It’s not time to rebuild.

Besides, the Broncos’ offense is very complicated. I don’t know if Cutler can figure out how to fake the handoff and then run to the other side of the field every single freaking play.

A disturbing trend is the front office's inability to solve problems quickly. For years and years the Broncos sought a quality third receiver, but never found one. For three straight years the Broncos have been thrashed in the playoffs by prolific passing offenses. So this year they dumped Pryce and cornerback Lenny Walls. Are they better against the pass now? I doubt it.

The offense should be as good as last year. Merging the Mike Anderson/Tatum Bell attack into a single Mike Bell is probably a step down, but the entire offense is built around running effectively, so I’m not worried. And I expect Plummer to be better than ever this year. He’s coming off a great year but a bad playoffs, and he’ll have Cutler looking over his should all year long. He’ll be motivated, and I think he’ll respond with a great season.

The defense is as questionable as ever. Every regular season the Broncos have tremendous statistics, but break apart in the postseason. I hate to say it, but when Peyton Manning lines up across from us, he sees his brothers.

Last year the Broncos held opponents to a pathetic 6.25 yards per pass attempt, fourth-best in the league. Against Pittsburgh, though, our DBs were running in sand. I’d love to say it’ll be different this year, but I have no reason to think that. We will have some continuity going for us, and that will help.

Outlook: Despite some questions, I fully expect the Broncos, if healthy, to repeat last year’s division title. They could be even better in the postseason-the AFC is wide-open this year. I can’t wait.

Comments

David said…
I don’t know if Cutler can figure out how to fake the handoff and then run to the other side of the field every single freaking play.

so true... everyone raves about mike shanahan's "complicated offense." but for broncos fans... it doesn't seem that complicated. Tight end flare, qb roll out, play action... a few off tackles and we are good to go.

great read mikey
Mike said…
Thanks, man. I love how commentators act like play-action is revolutionary, or that we're the only team doing it.

I'm sure most of the NFL is less complicated than we're led to believe. Why do they try so hard to maintain the mystique?
Anonymous said…
I completely agree with the Mike Bell anaysis. He's talked about like he is the next great back in Denver. I'll need to see it before I believe it. I also agree that Plummer will have a great year - partly due to Javon Walker.

I'm really worried about the pass rush. The biggest problem with the pass rush is that there is no pass rush. With Pryce gone, we're going to be hurting big time.

Even with all of these red flags, the Broncos are always competitive and usually in the playoffs. The last non-competitive team I remember was back in the Gaston Green and Li Lo Land era.
Anonymous said…
edit: That was Li Lo Lang
Mike said…
Well, it kind of depends how you define "competitive"-the Broncos went 6-10 right after the two Super Bowls (year one of Griese), though they were kind of tough down the stretch. But yes, they are almost always at least a .500 team.

Popular posts from this blog

And now that it’s gone, it’s like it wasn’t there at all

I never thought this blog would last longer than Jay Cutler's career with the Denver Broncos. He was a talented young prospect so good that the Broncos, a powerhouse organization only one game removed from the Super Bowl the season before, traded up to get him—or, in other words, a player whose upside was so huge, the team sacrificed its present to get his future. And now? He's gone . How did it come to this? * * * Often I'll play devil's advocate with a move like this; you know, I'll try and explain how it makes sense from the other side of the table. Today, during the most disastrous Broncos offseason in memory—and the draft hasn't even happened yet, so settle in—I just don't have it in me. I don't think move is really defensible from a football standpoint. But what the heck: as the article above says, the Broncos are sending Cutler and a fifth-round draft pick this month to the Chicago Bears for quarterback Kyle Orton, Chicago's first-rounder in t...

Five mini-columns

In this in-between time at the start of football and late-but-not-that-late in the everlasting baseball season, there's not any one topic that stands out, so I thought I'd give you my well thought out opinions on five things in sports (originally ten, but I let No. 3 run so long that I thought I'd cut it short (having now finished this, I realize the word short is out of place here)). This probably means I'll have nothing to write about for weeks, so enjoy. Keep in mind that a) I came up with this list at 2 a.m. this morning (I couldn't sleep and I'm not kidding; you have no idea the kind of pressure that comes with running this website) and b) I'm still not making any money off this, so if it makes no sense, blame yourself (which, interestingly enough, also makes no sense). And we're off! 1) Maurice Clarett vs. Ohio State: Before you skip down to No. 2, which I would certainly do in your position, hear me out. There is actually a little timeliness to t...

Did CU ever win the Pac-12?

In 2010, I bet a college buddy of mine (who longtime readers may remember as the only other contributor to Hole Punch Sports) that CU’s football team would not win the Pac-12 in the next 15 years. Guess what? It’s time for me to gloat, because I was right. Why we were doomed Back in the day, a lot of people made the argument that CU should join the Pac-12 because we’d get so much more TV money there. Of course, given college football is the answer to the question, “what if you had a sport where multiple teams were like the Yankees, and you created a whole universe of haves and have-nots?”, then yeah, you want to be aligned with some of the haves. But the question in my mind wasn’t, “will CU be better off with more money?” That’s an obvious yes. The question I asked was, will CU be any more competitive in their own conference if they’re competing against teams who are also getting more money? I couldn’t see why they would be. The mathematical angle Legend has it that Cowboys runn...