Kansas City Chiefs @ Denver Broncos -- Friday Injury Report

by Jeremy Bolander on Dec 5, 2008 3:32 PM MST in 2008 Game Previews Comment 6 comments

Denver Broncos
Player	Injury	Wed. Participation	Thur. Participation	Fri. Participation	Friday Status
S Marlon McCree	Ankle	Did Not Participate	Limited Participation	Limited Participation	Questionable
DL Ebenezer Ekuban	Back	Did Not Participate	Limited Participation	Limited Participation	Questionable
LB Nate Webster	Knee	FullParticipation	Full Participation	Full Participation	Probable
LB D.J. Williams	Knee	FullParticipation	Limited Participation	Limited Participation	Doubtful
CB Champ Bailey	Groin	Limited Participation	Limited Participation	Limited Participation	Questionable
RB Selvin Young	Groin	FullParticipation	Full Participation	Full Participation	Probable
DT DeWayne Robertson	Knees	Full Participation	Full Participation	Full Participation	Probable
DL Kenny Peterson	Achilles	Full Participation	Full Participation	Full Participation	Probable
WR Brandon Marshall	Hip	Full Participation	Full Participation	Full Participation	Probable
FB/LB Spencer Larsen	Groin/Hip	Full Participation	Limited Participation	Limited Participation	Questionable
WR Chad Jackson	Ankle	Full Participation	Full Participation	Full Participation	Probable
FB Peyton Hillis	Hip	Full Participation	Full Participation	Full Participation	Probable
G Ben Hamilton	Wrist	Full Participation	Full Participation	Full Participation	Probable
RB P.J. Pope	Ribs	Full Participation	Full Participation	Full Participation	Probable
Kansas City Chiefs
Player	Injury	Wed. Participation	Thur. Participation	Fri. Participation	Friday Status
LB Donnie Edwards	Hamstring/Knee	Did Not Participate	Did Not Participate	Did Not Participate	Out
CB Patrick Surtain	Quadriceps	Did Not Participate	Did Not Participate	Did Not Participate	Out
DE Tamba Hali	Ankle	Limited Participation	Full Participation	Full Participation	Probable
G Adrian Jones	Ankle	Limited Participation	Limited Participation	Limited Participation	Questionable
C Rudy Niswanger	Ankle	Limited Participation	Full Participation	Full Participation	Probable
G Wade Smith	Ankle	Limited Participation	Full Participation	Full Participation	Probable
LB Pat Thomas	Hamstring	Limited Participation	Full Participation	Did Not Participate	Questionable
WR Mark Bradley	Calf	Not Listed	Did Not Participate	Limited Participation	Out

Anyone thinking what I am thinking? Namely that Nate is going to be put in a position to "put up or shut up", to put it bluntly? By only switching out ONE component at LB this week, we will get a better feel for the individual LBs within the unit, instead of changing out the whole corp like we did when they all went down with injuries back to back...
No matter what kind of conspiracy theories we might come up with, it will be nice that DJ and Champ aren't being rushed. Winning games right now is still important, but the overall strategy needs to be observed as well, and that is to go into a home playoff game with as many healthy players as possible...
Larsen listed as questionable makes me wonder about the FB gameplan going against KC. Last week we ran single back sets, and if Larsen isn't better than 50-50, it means we will either see the scheme from last week or Andrew Pinnock, and something tells me that, despite what Shanny is saying right now, Pinnock isn't ready yet....

2 recs | Comment 6 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

but the overall strategy needs to be observed as well, and that is to go into a home playoff game with as many healthy players as possible…

I hate to be the contrarian (not really…I quite enjoy it actually), but our overall strategy needs to be to get into the playoffs first (which I’ll remind everybody we have not yet accomplished) and THEN worry about injuries. On Sunday we play a Chiefs team that whooped our yahoos in week four. Then we have a very difficult game in Carolina which is followed by a tough and desperate Bills team. I don’t think I need to remind anyone how the season concludes.

Therefore, I think our ’overall strategy" needs to be doing whatever it takes to win every game until we are actually IN the playoffs. I have the feeling that we are all getting a little ahead of ourselves.

GO BRONCOS!!!

by UnarmingMermaid on Dec 5, 2008 3:52 PM MST reply actions 0 recs

In terms of the FB or no FB dilema…I would abide by the “if it’s not broke…” strategy. I think sometimes Shanny and Bates out-think themselves. Hillis just run for nealy 130 yards out of mostly singleback/3 WR formation against a very stout Jets defense…so I don’t know why you’d do much tampering.

GO BRONCOS!!!

by UnarmingMermaid on Dec 5, 2008 3:56 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Last point...

The beauty of having the WR packages that we do is it forces a defence to respect the pass. It forces defensive coordinators to take players out of the box and, therefore, allows a powerfull RB like Hillis be able to bulldoze right up the middle. You don’t need a FB because there aren’t as many players to block. If they try to cheat in…we can smoke ’em with Royal, BMarsh, Stokley, Scheff, or even a flat route with Hillis. I love it.

GO BRONCOS!!!

by UnarmingMermaid on Dec 5, 2008 4:00 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

I think the difference

in the front sevens, personnell wise, between the Jets and KC, are what would prompt us to prefer running behind a FB against KC, but spreading the defense horizontally against the Jets. HT addressed this (I think) in his Chalk Talk.

The Chiefs are crazy about turnovers though. I really hope we keep the ball on the ground to ge the early lead established. They will be flying around like madmen out there…

Concision in style, precision in thought, decision in life.

by Jeremy Bolander on Dec 5, 2008 5:01 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Because

The Jets were taken by surprise by that. The Cheifs have had a whole week to prepare for that. That is why you tamper with it. Bring in the FB and smash them in the mouth first…then go back to your 3 WR, 1 HB look and make them guess what you are doing.

by sadaraine on Dec 5, 2008 9:00 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

but I am talking specifically about players who are already injured. Rushing them back is a near guarantee to lose them for longer, especially the way this season has gone. Because we do not have to win out to secure our division, I think the Broncos have an opportunity for informed risk management, including the controversial idea of not thinking they need their best players on the field against the Chiefs. I think it is a legitimate stance, if they take it, on the grounds that the Chiefs are a struggling team, with far more problems than us. If our backups play well, and they have proven they can, then they are as probable to secure a win as our recovering starters.

If we had to win three for a chance, I would lean more towards your point of view. If we had to win out I would be 100% on your side. But needing to pick up two games in the division, with the Chargers in their current state, seems like a strong indicator that our strategy can subsume the wider palette of protecting some of our stars. I think the classification of this opinion is firmly rooted in the same genus that gives us the “rest your starters in the final game of the season” opinion.

Which is all I’m talking about here: my opinion. As much as football seems to be a momentum-based game, practicing risk-management is a slippery slope, best left to minds like Shanny’s….

Concision in style, precision in thought, decision in life.

by Jeremy Bolander on Dec 5, 2008 5:11 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs