Evans: The Broncos offense is at the kids table
Watch: A Backup QB Battle, Bo Nix And The Broncos Get Used To Davis Webb, And Could Taysom Hill Be Denver-Bound - Three Big Things From Broncos Training Camp | 14 mins
I’ve always felt, until proven otherwise, the Denver Broncos model of success can continue. Win with a suffocating defense and an offense that does just enough and, more importantly, stays out of the defense’s way.
So far, so good, as the Broncos are off to a 2-0 start.
But apparently not everyone feels that way.
NFL Network’s Michael Silver (a wedge driver after my own heart) went into the Broncos locker room after the win against the Indianapolis Colts with the intention of looking for friction between the Broncos’ offense and defense.
Boy, did he find an accommodating audience.
Wide receiver Demaryius Thomas said this can’t continue.
“It’s hard — you’re always putting it on the defense, and at some point, that’s tough to count on,” Thomas told Silver. “There’s no reason to keep it close. Last year, a lot of things went our way, but that can catch up to you.”
He later added: “We’ve just got to be better in the red zone. We had 400 yards of offense, and the defense scored two touchdowns. We scored one. Every time we get on the 30, we just … we’ve just got to be better.”
D.T. also mentioned how little he and Emmanuel Sanders are being used in the passing game.
My read on this is frustration with Gary Kubiak’s offense, not a lack of confidence in Trevor Siemian. Kubiak’s offense is old school, archaic, practical — however you want to describe it — but Peyton Manning- like it isn’t.
And that’s what D.T. has been used to.
Kubiak is not cutting Siemian loose. Oh sure, he threw it 25 times in the first half, but there is such a conservative bent to the Broncos passing game.
And the real trust that’s needed inside the red zone just isn’t being shown to Siemian.
A couple of examples: Third quarter, 13-13 game, second and two at the Colts 15-yard line, and C.J. Anderson gets just a yard. Third and one, back to Anderson, and he loses a yard. Broncos kick a field goal to go up 16-13.
Then, fourth quarter, Denver up 23-20, third and one from the Colts 17-yard line, and Anderson runs for no gain. Another Broncos field goal.
In the second half Siemian threw it just eight times as Kubiak became ultra-vanilla.
I get what Kubiak is doing. It’s what I preached all offseason when we were sifting through all the quarterback options. The common theme was find a guy who won’t turn it over and play to the strength of this team, which is the defense.
I don’t argue with the strategy. I believe in this model.
But do the players?
Consider the source in D.T. He’s a wide receiver. Those guys have become the biggest divas in the NFL.
D.T. is into the second year of his monster contract, and already you’ve got disgruntled fans saying the Broncos should cut him or restructure his deal.
He wants to preserve this contract plus put himself in position for another big pay day.
But this becomes an issue if it affects the defense.
Consider these comments from Chris Harris to Michael Silver: “Man, we’ve got a formula, and that formula won us a Super Bowl, so we aren’t gonna change it. So (the offensive players) have got to be patient. It’s a long season.”
Wow, if that wasn’t “pat you on the head/why don’t you go sit at the kids’ table while us adults sit here” condescending, I don’t know what is.
Then Harris went for more.
“Teams play us differently,” Harris said. “They take their time, because they’re very aware of how dangerous our defense is. If we could ever get up two touchdowns, when they have to come after us, it’d be Pick City. We just can’t get up by two touchdowns.”
Look, I’m not saying there’s this great divide in the Broncos locker room with finger pointing and talking behind backs running rampant. The Broncos are defending Super Bowl champions, and they’re 2-0.
As long as they keep winning, this won’t be an issue. But if losses start to pop up, expect the Broncos offense, and Kubiak’s play calling, to become a major source of friction in that room.
Comments
0 Comments