So what on earth is wrong with the interior? Assuming Marcus Thomas avoids suspension and plays up to his potential in '08, Thomas and Alvin McKinley are the only serviceable starters on our roster heading into next season. Denver tried desperately to put together a deal for Jets castoff Dwayne Robertson, but that deal is dead in the water for now. Even with a deal for a healthy, fairly-compensated Robertson, we are still in bad shape.
Let's look at what went wrong. First mistake: Shanahan anoints Jim Bates as defensive coordinator. Traditionally a 2-gap scheme, Bates transforms Denver into a smaller, more athletic interior. This experiment is a miserable failure and Shanahan demotes Bates (who later quit) in favor of Bob Slowik. After a string of failed free agent help, Denver is left with some talent that fails to fit the traditional stop-the-run-first defensive scheme. Here's a telling quote to this effect from an anonymous source via Fox Colorado:
“Then they hired the wrong guy Jim Bates, then they get rid of him. See, no one else would have hired Bates because they know he doesn’t know what he’s doing anymore. So you bring him in [Bates], and then you go from using the big 2 gap d-lineman, [and then] go to small guys. Nobody can do that in the middle of the season. You got rid of some guys thinking the young guys would be good, and the young guys aren’t that good…So when you don’t draft well, and you don’t use the personnel you got, now you got a problem…You got a shortage of talent, and no cap room,” said agent A.
Just how bad were we? Put it this way, Marcus Thomas lead all Broncos DT's in tackles last season with 20. There were 82 tackles in the NFL last season that bested this total; this amounts to 2.6 players per team. Yikes! That's embarrassing.
Under new defensive coordinator Bob Slowik, Denver will almost certainly return to a 2-gap scheme. To do so, we are (a) going to have to add multiple defensive tackles in April's draft and (b) going to have to find specific types of talents to balance our line. In the coming week, I'm going to talk specifically about who I think are the best fit for these needs in this year's draft.
In contemplation of this analysis, lets review some basic defensive-line jargon to help differentiate between different types of defensive line talents. Defensive tackles are often referred to as 0-technique (aka "NT"), 2-technique, or 3-technique. You may also have heard them referred to as 1-gap or 2-gap tackles. Here's a breakdown of what each term specifically means:
- Technique: This term actually refers to where the DT lines up. In defensive terminology there are 3 gaps: the A-gap, B-gap, and C-gap. The A-gap refers to the space (on either side) between the Center and the Guard; the B-gap refers to the space between the Guard and the Tackle; and the C-gap refers to the space outside the tackle. A 0-technique tackle lines up nose to nose with the Center (hence "Nose Tackle");a 1-technique tackle lines up in the A-gap; a 2-technique tackle lines up nose to nose with the Guard; and a 3-technique tackle lines up in the B-gap.
When referring to a 3-technique tackle, the media is referring to a player that is a pass rush specialist. Denver doesn't use a "nose tackle" but instead relies on 2-technique tackles, which are typically adept at stopping the run. A select few DT's can be effective at the 1-technique or the 2-technique. Many DT's are capable of handling the 3-technique or the 2-technique. To better understand why this is, we need to talk about gap assignments. - Gap Assignments: Defensive tackles are also categorized as 1-gap or 2-gap tackles. A 1-gap tackle is a pass-rush specialist. His assignment is to line up in the B-gap (hence they are also called "3-technique tackles") and 'shoot the gap' to break into the backfield and disrupt the play. These are smaller, more agile players.
A 2-gap tackle will (in the 4-3) generally line up at the 2-technique (nose to nose with the guard). Because they have a gap on either side, they are not trying to penetrate the line. Rather, their role is to cover both gaps in the case of a run or to collapse the pocket in the case of pass. These are heavier, stronger players.
In many ways, these definitions are an oversimplification; however, understanding of these basic principles will help you realize the type of talent Denver will be looking to acquire in this year's draft. In the coming days, I'll discuss the draft prospects at defensive tackle and try and sort out who should be on our radar in April.
2 comments:
Interesting article. Referring to your comments on Bates, however, I would remind you that in the early part of last season Bates was actually pushing for larger interior linemen in his two-gap system in order to plug the line (recall the unfortunate tenures of Sam Adams, Jimmy Kennedy, and Amon Gordon). When these tactics yielded poor results, the team went to a smaller defensive line interior, potentially directed by Slowik.
My criticism of Bates is based on anecdotal evidence available from the same sources you probably read. Thus, it is entirely possible--if not probable--that I have an inaccurate version of events. For all intensive purposes, Bates is the fall guy.
The only thing I can confidently assert is that Bates' system was not a pure 2-gap scheme. He (perhaps in concert with Slowik or Shanahan) wanted to run with a 3-technique to improve our chronically anemic pass rush.
One thing is for sure: had Adams, Kennedy, or Amon panned out for Denver last season, we probably aren't having a postmortem discussion. The major contributor to the dysfunction was lack of the right personnel (as is still the problem).
Whatever Slowik's role was in last seasons embarrassment, Denver is most certainly going to look for at least two gap defenders either via the draft or via trades on draft day; however, your point is well taken that the popular criticism of Bates is possibly unfounded.
Thanks for commenting.
Post a Comment