Re-watching Thursday’s game and studying it a tad, it really was the quintessential Moore game we’ve come to know and love. First of all his stats, once again, should have been a lot better, and they were pretty damn good. He hit several guys in the hands who dropped, including Shoe who not only did not catch it (he had a TD if he did) but handed it the DB for an INT. His toss to Matt Miller for a TD was classic; perfect timing, placement, and although a fairly intense pass, a supremely catchable ball. Kellen Moore.
In writing about Kellen over the years now I’ve used several analogies. The most obscure is to a Native American from James Michener’s “Centennial”, “Lame Beaver”. Seems an odd name to give a chief, almost sounds like an insult. But the name is quite an honor; the Native Americans knew that a beaver possesses few innate physical skills to start with, neither fast, strong, or able to engage an adversary with tooth/nail. A lame one is at an even greater disadvantage; so it must be very very clever to survive, must think not 2 or 3 steps ahead in every situation, but 10. He must be resourceful and, ultimately, fearless: Michener describes in his story how the honorific applies to this character; I do it with Kellen. Like the lame beaver, he lacks mobility, speed, power-you name it. Heck some even say he doesn’t have that great of an arm. But he studies, prepares, works on every gift he DOES have until he’s drained every last possible drop of talent/execution out of it and then goes into the game, not cocky, but supremely “in the moment”. I’ve never seen a man so intense while also enjoying himself.
I’ve compared him in the pocket to Joe Dimaggio, “The Yankee Clipper”. Joe’s nickname referred to the ease with which he covered center field, so graceful it appeared effortless while at the same time covering enormous amounts of territory. Kellen has that same quality. By quality, I’m referring to the quality of his exertion; like Joe, it appeared relaxed, not stressed, but still obtained a high degree of energy disbursement.
But my favorite analogy, and the one on display so well Thursday, was Kellen as the king on a chessboard. Note now that we’re describing a different aspect to Kellen; the study, film watching, preparation etc. are part of the STRATEGIC aspect of Kellen. His greatest TACTICAL gift in my opinion was his “pocket presence”, and I doubt will see a QB again who had it better than Kellen. The king on a chessboard can move only one space, in any direction. While this appears to be a limitation, the king is a remarkably effective defensive piece. If you’ve ever observed a competent chess player employ it, it can change the board dramatically. Kellen had the king’s economy of movement; he never stepped when he could shift, never ran when he could step, never took any Moore ground than he absolutely had to to achieve his purpose-he was the anti-Fran Tarketon. And his economy of movement, poise and demeanor in the pocket meant he NEVER lost focus downfield, his attention was never seriously disrupted, and thus allowing hm to bring to bear his other redoubtable skills-instant check offs, look offs, a thousand “reads” per second such that the secondary did not know where he was going ’til he went- almost always too late. And if the pressure was too good, or the coverage too sound, or if for some intangible reason the play just wasn’t “there”, Kellen saw it in a nanosecond and said “OK, you beat me-try doing it again” and tossed it away.
So we’re all a little bummed now that the inevitable has come to pass. We lose Kellen. But it is helpful to keep in mind that the Kellen Moore model QB is not the standard Bronco one. I’ve been trying to break it down, and I’d say roughly 1/3 of our QBs in the past 43 years have been “pure” pocket passers (and Kellen is the purest). Jimmy Mac and Dinwiddie certainly belong with him, probably Aliotti. After them it becomes kinda’ difficult to categorize (and memory fades). We were always a passing team (sounds quaint huh?), but with Bart Hendricks and “Z” we had another dimension. I’m thinking there was a reason we saw the “wildcat” a lot; it looks like South and Hedrick will battle it out, and whoever wins I think we’ll see the “wild” without the cat. So the Ds that play us will swap one set of problems for another. And Coach Pete’s offensive philosophy is premised on the concept that the defense has to give you something, it cannot protect against everything. We have simply gotten used to seeing Boise State exploit the defense in a certain fashion- but trust me Coach Pete and staff have had a very long time to consider the day when we go Moore-less. Additionally, Kellen suggested something we should consider. I forget which game we were going into, but he stressed that so much of what goes on depends on the lines. On offense, we return 4 starters, plus have a bevy of other guys who have started. Point for us. On D-we lose entire line plus one ( I consider Root our 5th starter on D-line). If we have trouble next year, it may not be replacing Moore, but Root, along with Baker, Winn, McLellin, and Crawford. Yeah, Happy New Year to you too.
Add The Sports Daily to your Google News Feed!
