The Dude Abides...The Stats That Don't Lie, Week 9
--Al Swearengen
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Week 9 of the NFL. Every team has now played half of its schedule. We are beginning to see which teams are looking to give out the beatings on a regular basis (New Orleans), which teams are looking to take the beatings on a regular basis (Detroit), and which teams are just looking for Tim Tebow.
The Denver Broncos? They took another punch to the face this week, but with a 6-2 record, let's just say, I wouldn't want to find myself in a back alley with Brian Dawkins.
Welcome once again to The Stats That Don't Lie for Week 9. These are the adamantium claws of stats. Your statistical Weapon X. In short, these are the stats that are enough to piss off a Wolverine. They are: Turnovers, Field Position, Time of Possession, and 3rd-Down Efficiency.
As always, for those that need a primer, or want to look at the stats from previous weeks, just click on the following links (Raiders fans, if your mom says it's not past your bedtime, I guess you can click too):
I'm not going to lie to you, my friends. In these four statistical categories, the Broncos continue to nose dive faster than Mitch Berger's roster spot. Let's take a look from last week:
Week 8 - Broncos' Rankings
Average Turnovers/Game: 2nd (tied with New England and Indianapolis)
Average Starting Field Position: 26th
Average Time of Possession: 13th
Average 3rd Down Efficiency: 19th
Week 9 - Broncos' Rankings
Average Turnovers/Game: 6th (tied with Baltimore)
Average Starting Field Position: 25th
Average Time of Possession: 16th
Average 3rd Down Efficiency: 18th
Last week I wrote that Denver continues to show a dangerous trend that could not be sustained. From this week's rankings, this disturbing trend continues. On average, the Broncos are starting drives on the 27.70-yard line (this is up slightly from last week because I went back and re-adjusted for the two Eddie Royal returns for scores). This is lower than the league average of 29.59, and lower than both Tampa Bay (30.06) and the Broncos' next opponent Washington (28.44).
While the last two games are easy to "pin" on Mitch Berger (and fries), this trend started well before his signing. Even when Denver was winning, they were continuing to lose the battle of field position. There is plenty of blame to go around, from the coverage and return units, to the returners and kickers themselves. I usually try and restrict my views to stat-based, but I am making a plea for Alphonso Smith on both punt and kick returns. Now that Ty Law is here for nickel situations, it makes sense for Smith to get on the field in this capacity. Given that he was drafted in part to be a returner, I think he ought to be given consideration once again.
We need to also be honest regarding 3rd-down efficiency. The Broncos are really starting to suck (not Raider bad, but pretty bad), converting only 37%, which is right at the league average. Even the putrid Detroit Lions (37.55%) have a better 3rd-down efficiency than does Denver. If the Broncos ever want to make a legitimate run at the playoffs, they need to be above 40%. As an example, Minnesota (46.19%) and New England (44.70%) are well in front of them. Emmett Smith and I pointed out Orton's problems on 3rd and long in a previous article on Monday, and until Denver improves on 3rd down, the criticism of Orton will continue, and much of it will be warranted.
In Orton's defense, part of the problem has been Denver's running game. MHR member Boydy pointed this out on several instances during the game thread. On 2nd and long, the Broncos were running up the middle for very short, putting themselves in 3rd and long on several occasions. And (all together now in a chant) Orton needs manageable situations.
Is it the play calling? Ben Hamilton? A Brett Kern/Jack Williams jinx? Those are questions that many MHR members have already answered in far greater numbers and with more preciseness than I. However, later in the week, I'll be looking at every single sack and incompletion from the Baltimore and Pittsburgh games (play-by-play) with some statistical analysis of the situation.
Through Week 9, here are the rankings of the 32 teams in the four categories:
In addition to Denver, I've highlighted two other teams worth noting. Both are in the top ten in these four statistical categories. They are New England and Minnesota. In particular, notice how well balanced New England is, ranking 1st in Turnovers, 8th in Field Position, 3rd in Time of Possession, and 6th in 3rd downs. I think anyone who would pick against the Patriots right now is a complete fool. I fully expect them to beat the Colts in Indianapolis in the coming week. Peyton Manning could be the best QB that ever played, but the Patriots are a team, and last time I checked, Tom Brady isn't JaMarcus Russell.
Week 9 Games
Before getting into the Week 9 numbers, a few of the games are of note, and I'd like to spend at least a little time on them, because they really illustrate some interesting points.
First, there's not much to say about the Denver/Pittsburgh game other than Denver lost all four categories for the 2nd straight week in a row. If you lose all four, you very rarely win in the NFL, because it means you simply haven't been on the field very much, you aren't generating opportunities to score, and when you are on the field, you can't sustain anything. While it's Raider football, it doesn't get me fired up.
Denver's average starting field position for the game was the 21.64 yard line, as MHR member Chibronx pointed out in an earlier post today. The Broncos could just as well told the referees before the game, "We'll just take a touchback if you don't mind...every drive." They were also a nasty 35.71% on third downs, while Pittsburgh was 58.33%.
There were two games this week that almost made a liar out of the Stats That Don't Lie. The San Diego/New York game was the first. The second was the Miami/New England game. In both cases, the winning team only won field position, and by a small margin. How does one explain such anomalies?
In a nutshell, both field position and turnovers are relative to location, and situation. This is intuitive, and has been brought up before. Bur more importantly, if you look at the stats from these two games, the turnover battle was within one. And, as much as I like to make stats the definitive answer to all subjects football, even I will admit that sometimes, football is about making one or two plays that the stats just won't describe.
Such was San Diego's last drive. The Chargers got the ball at the 20-yard line, took little time off the clock (1:46), didn't need any 3rd-down conversions (they were striking too quickly), and they didn't turn the ball over. Sometimes a great play is better than a stat (John Elway made a career out of this, after all; Dan Marino, not so much).
Perhaps I am still curing my Cutler obsession, but I just can't resist looking at the Arizona/Chicago game statistically. Up until last week, the Bears had been taking advantage of field position to the extent that they led the league in this category. So what happens when they get a game in which their average starting field position is the 26-yard line? Well, Cutler throws for over 300 yards, 3 TDs...and they lose. What would you rather have? Field position or yards? Give me the field position everyday.
Lastly, a lot was made over how the Ravens dominated Denver last week, but look what happens to them just a week later when they don't start on average at the 40-yard line, and their 3rd-down percentage is 10%. Does this mean the Bengals are suddenly better than Denver? No, it simply means that being in the same division breeds not only contempt, but familiarity. It's the same reason Oakland can go and beat a team like Philadelphia, but the next week, against a division opponent, become the same cuddly Tom Cable-coached team.
Week 9 Summaries:
2-Turnover Rule (Explained Here)
-
3 teams had 0 turnovers. 1 won (33%); For the season, 41/51 (80%)
-
9 teams had 1 turnover. 6 won (67%); For the season, 41/69 (59%)
-
8 teams had 2 turnovers. 6 won (75%); For the season, 36/77 (47%)
-
4 teams had 3 turnovers. 0 won (0%); For the season, 7/36 (19%)
-
1 team had 4 turnovers. None won (0%); For the season, 4/19 (21%)
-
1 teams had 5+ turnovers. None won (0%); For the season, 0/6 (0%)
Week 9 Big Picture:
-
The team that won the turnover battle won 10 of 13 games played (77%).
-
In the previous category, remove the ties (2 games) and this changes to 62%
-
The team that won the time of possession battle won 6 of the 13 games played (46%). This is the lowest I have seen this figure in 2 seasons for an individual week.
-
The team that had better third down efficiency won 8 of the 13 games played (62%).
-
The team that had better average starting field position won 9 of the 13 games played (69%).
-
There were 3 games this week in which a team won all four categories. In 3 of the 3, the same team won on the scoreboard (100%). For the season, this stat is 44 out of 45 games.
-
The winning teams this week averaged 1.38 turnovers, 29:43 in time of possession, 44.64% on 3rd downs, and their average starting field position was the 30:97 yard line. This is the first time I have ever seen time of possession below 30 minutes for the winners in an individual week.
Top 5 in Week 9:
-
Top 5 in giveaways: 1. TEN; 2. MIA; 3. KC; 4. 9 Teams tied with 1
-
Top 5 in time of possession: 1.CIN 2.NYG 3.JAX 4.GB 5. HOU
-
Top 5 in 3rd downs: 1.HOU 2.PIT 3.ARZ 4.WAS 5.JAX
-
Top 5 in avg. starting field position: 1.DET 2.TB 3.ATL 4.ARZ 5.TEN
Running Totals, Season (through 9 weeks):
-
129 games have been played this season
-
82.95% were won by the team with less turnovers (counting ties as wins)
-
66.67% with a better time of possession
-
67.44% by the team who won on 3rd down
-
72.09% by the team that won the field position battle.
9-week Averages for Benchmarking This Week's Games:
9-week running average/game, turnovers (all teams): 1.71
9-week running average/game, time of possession (all teams): 30:11 (thanks to numerous OT games)
9-week running average/game, 3rd down efficiency (all teams): 37.61%
9-week running average, starting field position (all teams) 29.59 yard line
Here are the individual game stats from Week 9 (including obligatory comments):
The Look Ahead
Looking ahead to Washington, here is how the two teams stack up in the four statistical categories (keeping in mind these are averages/game):
Team Turnovers/Game Time of Possession Field Position 3rd-Down Efficiency
Denver 1.13 30:22 27.70 37.00%
Washington 1.88 28:44 28.44 31.83%
Washington clearly gives the ball up more often, and their 3rd-down efficiency is much worse than Denver's (which has been pretty bad as of late). Sure, the Skins generally get better field position, but not by much, and not enough to offset the other stats. Given Washington's average run defense, look for the Broncos to run the ball down Washington's throat and control the clock all day, setting up the play action to Marshall.
The Wolverine wants some more NFC East meat. Clinton Portis probably doesn't play after suffering a concussion. And, well Nobody makes The Stats That Don't Lie bleed its own blood 3 weeks in a row. Nobody!
Go Broncos!!!
Last Stat: 1.47% (percentage chance that Dan Snyder exchanges X-Mas Cards with John Riggins)
15 recs |
82 comments
| Add comment
|
Comments
Here's hoping that The Stats DON'T Lie this weekend.
I will just just get this one moment from Monday night off my chest. There was one play where the used the little floating cam behind Roethlisberger, it was late in the game and an OBVIOUS running situation. So I guess in that situation you would expect the safeties to be cheating up a little to take away the run. Well on this play and many others like it late in the game you could see, or couldn’t see( cause they weren’t on the screen), the safeties 20+ yards off the ball. Needless to say our safeties have to run 15 yards to meet Mendenhall 10 yards after the line of scrimmage, hence a first down for Pitt and a lost game for us. (obviously this is not the only reason, but it didn’t help when we were down two scores to give up 10+ yards per rush.)
Great read and great work.
by JALefor on Nov 11, 2009 8:54 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
Thanks, jalefor, thanks for reading
I know stats aren’t everyone’s cup of tea. I try to make them funny. Sometimes you eat the bar and sometimes the bar eats you.
"Wait, let me explain something to you...I'm the Dude. So, that's what you call me. You know, that, or 'His Dudeness,' or 'Duder,' or 'El Duderino,' if you're not into the whole brevity thing."
by TJ Johnson on Nov 11, 2009 2:05 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
bravissimo as always.
great read, and rec’d… err retweeted.
"I just looked across the huddle to see the guys in the huddle with me: great offensive line, great talent at wide receiver, great tight ends, great running backs. If we execute and play the way that we should, it should be tough to stop us."
-K.O.
by denver_diaspora on Nov 11, 2009 8:55 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
gracias, doble d, me alegro que te gusta
"Wait, let me explain something to you...I'm the Dude. So, that's what you call me. You know, that, or 'His Dudeness,' or 'Duder,' or 'El Duderino,' if you're not into the whole brevity thing."
by TJ Johnson on Nov 11, 2009 2:06 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
ah belissima! italiano!
actually dont understand a word of italian. i may have asked for you to butter my left ankle.
"I just looked across the huddle to see the guys in the huddle with me: great offensive line, great talent at wide receiver, great tight ends, great running backs. If we execute and play the way that we should, it should be tough to stop us."
-K.O.
by denver_diaspora on Nov 12, 2009 6:46 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Haven't even read the post yet, but props for the Al Swearengen reference.
I REALLY miss Deadwood.
- Jason
I gather speed by you f***ing with me - EV
by jubei on Nov 11, 2009 9:00 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
you beat me to the punch
I really miss Deadwood as well. One of the best shows ever.
by D-fence on Nov 11, 2009 9:18 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
You both beat me to the punch
any reference to Deadwood deserves a rec’d
Denver rookie head coach Josh McDaniels doesn't have a grasp on how to build a team." - John Clayton, April 23rd, 2009
by diviesti on Nov 11, 2009 10:46 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Jubei
Seemed appropriate after 2 arse kickings. Possibly my favorite line of all time. Very existential.
"Wait, let me explain something to you...I'm the Dude. So, that's what you call me. You know, that, or 'His Dudeness,' or 'Duder,' or 'El Duderino,' if you're not into the whole brevity thing."
by TJ Johnson on Nov 11, 2009 2:07 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Well done, as usual. Rec'd dude.
Washington is about to enter a world of pain.
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
by kentuckybronco on Nov 11, 2009 9:03 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
and how, kemosabe !
(apologies, that was terrible, but i’ve been saving that up for this week)
by Jenna Talia on Nov 11, 2009 9:27 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
haha, worth it.
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
by kentuckybronco on Nov 11, 2009 9:38 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
an indian reference? You amaze me Jenna
I would hope you would support who we are. Not, who we are not. Coach Norman Dale "Hoosiers"
by dmitchell624 on Nov 11, 2009 9:58 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
that was a compliment lady ;-)
I would hope you would support who we are. Not, who we are not. Coach Norman Dale "Hoosiers"
by dmitchell624 on Nov 11, 2009 10:31 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
JT, where is your 3 bears post? you say you aren't good at writing
…if you need someone to look at it, just let me know….you need to post that
"Wait, let me explain something to you...I'm the Dude. So, that's what you call me. You know, that, or 'His Dudeness,' or 'Duder,' or 'El Duderino,' if you're not into the whole brevity thing."
by TJ Johnson on Nov 11, 2009 2:08 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
are you sure ? its pretty bad
plus we hadn’t lost 2 in a row when i wrote it (bye week), and the bears were melting down…i do think i had some good ideas, but i’d feel better about it if we were on a 3 game winning streak, and Cutler was back to melting down again.
off topic, but is there MHR radio tonight ?
by Jenna Talia on Nov 11, 2009 4:00 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
JT, it's up to you, but probably three things
1) It can’t be as bad as you say (after all, you don’t live in Oakland)
2) Whatever glitches you have in it can be fixed
3) It’s your piece 100%, I am only an “advisor”
No problems. You can either shoot me an email or put it into google docs and send me an invite and I can make comments.
I have no problem helping MHR members with their stuff. It’s only the right thing to do. If you think I’m nice, just email HT or Emmett. They are SUPER nice.
I think there is a show tonight, but that is a stat that is possibly a lie:-)
"Wait, let me explain something to you...I'm the Dude. So, that's what you call me. You know, that, or 'His Dudeness,' or 'Duder,' or 'El Duderino,' if you're not into the whole brevity thing."
by TJ Johnson on Nov 11, 2009 4:23 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Jenna you are a bright lady
Go for it!
I would hope you would support who we are. Not, who we are not. Coach Norman Dale "Hoosiers"
by dmitchell624 on Nov 11, 2009 4:57 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
they're out of their element KB!
MARK IT ZERO!!!!
Dude, this is a league game, this determines who enters the next round robin. Am I wrong? Am I wrong?
You mark that frame an 8, and you're entering a world of pain.
by waltersobchakbronco on Nov 11, 2009 10:26 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly.
If the skins do manage to score, BDawk will politely go up to the referee and say “MARK IT ZERO!!!!!!!!!!!!”
They’ll do it.
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
by kentuckybronco on Nov 11, 2009 10:37 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
The Kahlua flows for you my Broncos friend.
Delicious.
by precisiontint on Nov 11, 2009 9:32 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
Thanks, man, there is this kid named Larry Sellers. He is the one who has your money...
"Wait, let me explain something to you...I'm the Dude. So, that's what you call me. You know, that, or 'His Dudeness,' or 'Duder,' or 'El Duderino,' if you're not into the whole brevity thing."
by TJ Johnson on Nov 11, 2009 2:09 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Pros for the plea for the Phonz
what about the stat that the ‘Skins take on Larry Johnson’s remaining $2.1 million base salary, in addition to a $62,500-per-game bonus he’s owed each week he’s active?
According to a league source, the Redskins have about $4 million remaining in cap space, which means they have some flexibility.
Good show Dude.
Character may be manifested in the great moments but it is made in the small ones -- Philip Brooks
by KaptainKirk on Nov 11, 2009 9:52 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
Kap, on a serious note, what is your take on that?
If someone picks him up, do they have to eat that existing contract, or can someone sign him for less now? How does that work?
"Wait, let me explain something to you...I'm the Dude. So, that's what you call me. You know, that, or 'His Dudeness,' or 'Duder,' or 'El Duderino,' if you're not into the whole brevity thing."
by TJ Johnson on Nov 11, 2009 2:13 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Just like I stated Dude
They will pay him what’s left of his contract, which is the $2.1 Mil. Plus the per game bonus. I’m not sure of the details why just yet, but those are the facts of the matter.
Character may be manifested in the great moments but it is made in the small ones -- Philip Brooks
by KaptainKirk on Nov 11, 2009 2:19 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Kap, so tell me, why would anyone pick him up?
Who would have the incentive. Only a guy like Jones or Synder, correct? Sorry with such stupid questions. You know the cap is not my thing, even though I am a finance guy.
"Wait, let me explain something to you...I'm the Dude. So, that's what you call me. You know, that, or 'His Dudeness,' or 'Duder,' or 'El Duderino,' if you're not into the whole brevity thing."
by TJ Johnson on Nov 11, 2009 2:20 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Once he clears waivers ...
After clearing waivers any team can sign him and they are not obligated to the 2.1 – only the Chiefs.
by Hank44 on Nov 11, 2009 3:34 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
thats
how i understood the LJ situation also
thx Hank !
by Jenna Talia on Nov 11, 2009 4:02 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
and THAT is why he cleared waivers
"Take what you can. Give nothing back!"
by Colorado_Kitten on Nov 11, 2009 4:52 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
rec'd dude!
MARK IT ZERO!!!!
Dude, this is a league game, this determines who enters the next round robin. Am I wrong? Am I wrong?
You mark that frame an 8, and you're entering a world of pain.
by waltersobchakbronco on Nov 11, 2009 10:30 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
Walter, I knew you weren't rolling out of here naked!
"Wait, let me explain something to you...I'm the Dude. So, that's what you call me. You know, that, or 'His Dudeness,' or 'Duder,' or 'El Duderino,' if you're not into the whole brevity thing."
by TJ Johnson on Nov 11, 2009 2:15 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Here are a couple of stats that don't lie:
Scoring the most points wins you the game 100% of the time. “So what’s your point?” you say. Well, could it be that in the same vein, time of possession, third down conversion even field position and turnovers are incidental to winning? “No way,” you say. Consider this then: The team that scores the most extra points wins over 99% (guessing here but that is probably easily true) of the time. That must then mean successfully scoring extra points is vital to winning, right?
by warmick on Nov 11, 2009 10:38 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
wait .............................. most yards don't win?
They lied to us last year!
I would hope you would support who we are. Not, who we are not. Coach Norman Dale "Hoosiers"
by dmitchell624 on Nov 11, 2009 11:38 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I think that you're right. Wait. Let's ask Cutler's Ghost. He would know.
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
by kentuckybronco on Nov 11, 2009 11:42 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
lol warmick
This reminds me of the time I was teaching pick off moves to 1st base to high school kids. One of them said, “We’ll just score more runs than they do.” I said, “Sure, but how about you practice the pick off anyway, just in case you go 0 for 4.”
I suppose when the plague was all “the rage,” there were guys going around saying, “Hey, these damn rats and idiot fleas are just incidental to the 99% correlation between having a tongue-down with your coughing girlfriend with and getting sick.”
Your comments have given me an idea for a stor
"Wait, let me explain something to you...I'm the Dude. So, that's what you call me. You know, that, or 'His Dudeness,' or 'Duder,' or 'El Duderino,' if you're not into the whole brevity thing."
by TJ Johnson on Nov 11, 2009 2:37 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Agree and caution about mistaking correlation with causation
It seems like some of these stats are more descriptive than predictive. Just like points for/against.
3rd down efficiency in particular strikes me as much more about how successful a team was on first and 2nd down, rather than a discreet “skill” that is independent from the overall quality of an offense. The small sample size of 3rd downs in any given game mean that you can have big fluctuations in the stat, but it may be relatively meaningless in predicting future performance. I believe FootballOutsiders has looked at this extensively, and adjusting for 3rd down variability is a big reason why their predictions are often more accurate than “common knowledge”.
So yes, because we lost the last 2 weeks our rankings in some of these categories nose-dived… but thats because the stats follow the results… and may not really be much of a predictor of future performance.
I do think Turnovers and Field Position are better predictive stats… teams that take care of the ball are more likely to win, and teams with good special teams and defenses (a key piece to field position) also tend to win.
by cjfarls on Nov 13, 2009 10:23 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
cjfarls, good points, if you want to run a multilinear regression feel free
"Wait, let me explain something to you...I'm the Dude. So, that's what you call me. You know, that, or 'His Dudeness,' or 'Duder,' or 'El Duderino,' if you're not into the whole brevity thing."
by TJ Johnson on Nov 13, 2009 11:05 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
if only I had the time or inclination!
I left my SAS stats package behind in grad school thank God!
In general, football stats are just really tough to decipher… the game is too complex for my limited time and stats capacity, so instead I just read as much as I can, and look to folks like FootballOutsiders, KC Joyner, etc. to do the number crunching ;-)
by cjfarls on Nov 14, 2009 4:38 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Respect!!!
"Wait, let me explain something to you...I'm the Dude. So, that's what you call me. You know, that, or 'His Dudeness,' or 'Duder,' or 'El Duderino,' if you're not into the whole brevity thing."
by TJ Johnson on Nov 11, 2009 2:37 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
RESPECT IS NOT GIVEN IT IS EARNED DOGGONIT!!!!!!!!
TAAAAAKE ITTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
by kentuckybronco on Nov 11, 2009 5:30 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Kyle Orton, Brian Dawkins and Head Coach Josh McDaniels will address the press at approximately 11:10 a.m. MST
by Calibroncoboy on Nov 11, 2009 10:47 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
thanks
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
by kentuckybronco on Nov 11, 2009 11:21 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
atta dude!
great as usual. this comment stood out to me:
Sometimes a great play is better than a stat …
i’ve been asking family and friends this question about orton: when’s the last time he made one of those “wow” plays? you know, the kind that rescues the team from a bad situation, makes a difference in game flow and is uncharacteristic of average QB play. the closest i can come up with is monday night where he underhanded a pass to graham, who then proceeded to drop it. not a normal QB play but it exhibited some athleticism, ingenuity and a cool head.
but besides that, orton really hasn’t made many unorthodox momentum changers. this is what he lacks the most, imho. he’s really starting to impress me with arm strength (lots of zip on those medium range balls), accuracy and finding the open man, but he just doesn’t seem to ever come up with that One Play that even a blind squirrel should find once in a blue moon.
by oxmouth on Nov 11, 2009 11:58 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
Hey oxmouth
I think you bring up a great point. There’s certainly been no moment like what you describe. Since Elway had so many, I can think of a lot, but remember the one where he ducked under the rusher, then threw a 60 yard TD bomb to Shannon Sharpe? Freakin’ amazing.
I don’t think we’re going to see that sort of thing from Kyle. In his press conference today, MCDaniels laughed at the talk that Orton couldn’t throw down the field. He said something like, well when their 2 safeties are playing 35 yards down the field, you are not going to be able to throw the deep ball.
I think it was legendarywalton who put a post about this awhile back, in which he describes the myths and realities of the gunslinging QB and American culture. I thought it was very well put together. I should look for it and link to it.
I too want him to make a play like this, unscripted, a few times a game. I think he has it in him. But as Jaws said on the broadcast the other night, perhaps Orton is so ingrained in trying to be part of the “system,” he’s not taking enough calculated risks.
"Wait, let me explain something to you...I'm the Dude. So, that's what you call me. You know, that, or 'His Dudeness,' or 'Duder,' or 'El Duderino,' if you're not into the whole brevity thing."
by TJ Johnson on Nov 11, 2009 2:43 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
YEAH! seattle.
i think that’s where elway did the duck and throw. at least that was the one i remember. one of the coolest plays EVER.
and agreed, i don’t see orton making many of those crazy game-turners either. which, kyle, sadly is why you won’t be starting next year, my friend.
and why is it that we can blow up personnel, bring in new ST coaches, bring in new head coaches AND STILL HAVE THE SUCKIEST FIELD POSITION IN THE LEAGUE?! not good.
by oxmouth on Nov 11, 2009 3:28 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think Denver has a returner
I’ve never liked Royal on kickoff returns. Take away his TD return, and he is not very good.
I thought Alphonso looked slow on his returns in the preseason. I suppose he couldn’t be worse than Royal . . . or could he?
by Broncos_FTW on Nov 11, 2009 12:29 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
His "two" return TDs.
He had a punt return TD and a kick return TD.
I’m still with you, though. I don’t think Royal is the answer. I’d like to see Alphonso get more gametime reps before we give up on him as a returner.
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
by kentuckybronco on Nov 11, 2009 12:35 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
+1
I agree that I don’t really like Royal, Phonz, or McKinley. Not sure that Kenny wouldn’t be the best of the three though…
"I will gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today" -- Wimpy J. Wellington
by Broncs Cheer on Nov 11, 2009 1:28 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Hey FTW
Yeah, I think he did look tentative at the beginning. I am hoping they would give him some more reps back there. We can’t do any worse than what we are now (starting on the 20) and since we drafted him in part as a returner, it will get him on the field as a playmaker (since Ty Law is out on nickel now). I think he has it in him (certainly in college he did). I just think he needs more reps out there.
I think it hurts Royal to be out there too much, although Tim Brown certainly fared well at it.
"Wait, let me explain something to you...I'm the Dude. So, that's what you call me. You know, that, or 'His Dudeness,' or 'Duder,' or 'El Duderino,' if you're not into the whole brevity thing."
by TJ Johnson on Nov 11, 2009 2:45 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
need to sound off
little to do with the thread but as soon as I can get Josh’s ear here are my 3 points. 1. find another punter – this new guy is the worst I’ve ever seen. so slow I’m surprised he hasn’t had 6 kicks blocked already in two games. accuracy and distance are a joke. 2. Lose DJ Williams, he never makes a big play and is always getting beat walking around flat footed-and the sooner the better. 3. the running game is stagnant , why not give Hillis some time, he was unstopable last year – give the guy a chance.
nuff said.
by keeroc on Nov 11, 2009 12:31 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
Keeroc, you feel free to use this thread any way you want, bro
I’ll try to discuss those points too.
1. In Berger’s career, he’s had 3 punts blocked in 804 attempts, so he hasn’t had a lot of punts blocked historically. But I agree, it sure looks slow as molasses.
2. I am not so sure about DJ. Before these last two games, there were many here at MHR who were saying he had a real shot at being a Pro-Bowler. Although I grant you, when I saw him on tape, he sometimes has a tendency to take a poor angle and get caught up in line traffic on the sweep.
3. I think many of us agree that Hillis is not being used as much as we would like. I really do believe he is a good short yardage back. I also would like to see him, although I have no stats to back up this claim that he is a good short yardage guy….yet!!
"Wait, let me explain something to you...I'm the Dude. So, that's what you call me. You know, that, or 'His Dudeness,' or 'Duder,' or 'El Duderino,' if you're not into the whole brevity thing."
by TJ Johnson on Nov 11, 2009 2:50 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Another great work dude and rec'd.
Redskins have a pretty good defense that might still give us some troubles on offense. Their offense isn’t very good and that’s their achilles heel. Look at the Chiefs up there with the big boys on the stats. The only stat that really hurts them is the 3rd down % at 21.30%. That’s once out of 5 tries.
by bfree2bronc on Nov 11, 2009 12:45 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
Bfree, thanks for noticing
I think the Chiefs can be very tough in the next few years with what I am seeing now. They really really suck on 3rd downs. But they don’t turn it over, which has kept them in a lot of games until the 4th quarter this year. I am not in the majority, but I think Cassell is the answer for them, as evidenced by his lack of INTs.
Agreed on the Skins. This is the week for Denver to run the ball, if ever. The running defense of the skins is the weakness. And being at home is a little scary. And it being an early game (Denver has never been rock solid in this time slot). If Denver were to lose a game like this, in which they should win, I would start to get a little worried. However, I am more worried right now about field position and 3rd downs for Denver. We have got to address this. They won’t go deep in the playoffs if they do not address 3rd downs soon.
"Wait, let me explain something to you...I'm the Dude. So, that's what you call me. You know, that, or 'His Dudeness,' or 'Duder,' or 'El Duderino,' if you're not into the whole brevity thing."
by TJ Johnson on Nov 11, 2009 2:58 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Excellent post, Dude
We’d better not expect a “gimme” this week. We have to have a great game against a mediocre opponent to get our Mojo back! Thanks and rec’d.
Go Broncos!
" Life is what happens while you're making other plans "
by hairybear on Nov 11, 2009 1:01 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
hey, hairybear, it's good to see you again, I wondered where you were off too
Mojo is good. Mojo is very good!
"Wait, let me explain something to you...I'm the Dude. So, that's what you call me. You know, that, or 'His Dudeness,' or 'Duder,' or 'El Duderino,' if you're not into the whole brevity thing."
by TJ Johnson on Nov 11, 2009 2:54 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Stats that don;t tell the whole story. I watched the game between Chicago and Arz and other than one great drive in the 1st quarter, the Bears offense was completely shutdown until the 4th quarter when Arz started playing their backup and only then did Chicago start to score some td. However, when Arz saw that the game might slip away, Chicago choke and turn the ball over and Arz put in Warner and he took the ball down the filed for the kill.
by airflash12 on Nov 11, 2009 1:16 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
welcome airflash12
Character may be manifested in the great moments but it is made in the small ones -- Philip Brooks
by KaptainKirk on Nov 11, 2009 2:13 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Hey Airflahs, Welcome also, I hope you at least enjoyed the piece from an entertainment level if
…stats are not your thing.
I also noticed that too. Did you see the shot of Leinart pouting after the pick. It looked like Warner came back in the game, through the TD, then went back over to Leinart to pump him back up.
Regarding Leinart. He is an interesting case study. I still think he could have a future in this league, although he doesn’t have confidence now, to be sure. And confidence is everything in sports.
"Wait, let me explain something to you...I'm the Dude. So, that's what you call me. You know, that, or 'His Dudeness,' or 'Duder,' or 'El Duderino,' if you're not into the whole brevity thing."
by TJ Johnson on Nov 11, 2009 2:53 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
well you never know
maybe football isn’t his (Leinart) thing…he might just be the next Chuck Liddell tho, right ?
; )
by Jenna Talia on Nov 11, 2009 4:10 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Hamilton benched
This is probably looked on by most of us as good news I’d imagine. (From the Denver Post just now:)
The longest-tenured Bronco has been bumped from the starting lineup.
According to a team source, Ben Hamilton, who has been with team since he was drafted in 2001, has been replaced at left guard by Russ Hochstein, who was acquired in August in a trade with New England.
Hochstein was with the first-team during the portion of Wednesday’s practice that was open to the media.
The commenter formerly known as "Dashiell".
by underdog on Nov 11, 2009 3:41 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
UD
Thanks for this info. Many here expected this, although I wasn’t one of them. I thought that if McD liked Russ, he would have already been starting. However, over the last week, Emmett (BroncoBear) has given me a lot of reasons why it makes sense…post concussion.
"Wait, let me explain something to you...I'm the Dude. So, that's what you call me. You know, that, or 'His Dudeness,' or 'Duder,' or 'El Duderino,' if you're not into the whole brevity thing."
by TJ Johnson on Nov 11, 2009 3:43 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed, Dude.
Hamilton looked really bad as of late so it’s the right move. I won’t overlook how solid he once was for the Broncos though. Thanks Ben! Now… to the bench with ye.
The commenter formerly known as "Dashiell".
by underdog on Nov 11, 2009 3:44 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I think it's time.
One of the things that I found disconcerting was the apparent increase in mental errors on Ben’s part. Missed assignments, etc. I wondered at times if that were due perhaps to some lingering issues with the concussions.
After the QB, I think that O-linemen have to have the fastest IPS. When the QB audibles, the center slides protection, etc, you have to be able to take that in and react quickly after the snap.
His physicality in the run game was the biggest issue in my mind, but the mental side after the concussions was more worrisome in terms of future impact on his well-being.
I wish the guy luck.
- Jason
I gather speed by you f***ing with me - EV
by jubei on Nov 11, 2009 4:17 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Totally agree with all of that
I think it went from one aspect of his game being a concern to, after the concussion, another. The mental mistakes were more apparent on Monday. He needs a break at least. Won’t call him “done” yet but he has to really improve to levels of 2 years ago to be starting again.
The commenter formerly known as "Dashiell".
by underdog on Nov 11, 2009 4:27 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Five teams at 6-2
There are five teams at 6-2. Denver is one. They have beaten 3 out of the other 4. Not bad.
by Hank44 on Nov 11, 2009 3:52 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
Great job my friend...always love this post!
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
All I want is 53 Rod Smiths. Is that asking too much????
"Peyton Hillis didn’t rip the sleeves off his jersey, they flew off out of fear."
Calijoefornia.
by boydy2669 on Nov 11, 2009 3:55 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
+1
Guardian of the Gate to La La Land!
Gonsoulin, Taylor, Little, Wright, Gradishar, Atwater, Davis, and Sharpe...
Why are they not in the Hall...I just don't understand.
by Mike Clark on Nov 11, 2009 6:03 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Bitingly concise and insightful as always Dude!
I remain very concerned about field position and third down conversions as we move forward into the second half of the schedule. Special teams need to bring the level of play up several notches and really be more cohesive than they’ve showed. Returners better grow a pair and start heading up the field immediately instead of being caught flat footed doing the cha cha cha. We better start picking up chunks of yards on first and second down to make the third realistically convertible or our poor defense is going to get worn down. I trust McDaniels and his coaching staff to see this and make adjustments, but I have this little kernel of anxiety nagging me.
Imagination is more important than knowledge. A. Einstein
by Ponderosa on Nov 11, 2009 4:50 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
The post has even improved, typing TJ is much easier than lebowski...
Thanks again TJ.
I must, however, bring up something that needs to again be said. The reason we lost the last two games is because teams have discovered that we have a twelve yard offense. I’m kinda happy that it took them six games to figure it out—but the results are in—they have figured our nakedness. They know they can play our team like a goal line defense at the two yard line—not a lot of room to cover.
I’ll tell you, I love the way Orton managed the start of our season, we needed an error free start to give our defense time to meld—but this week Orton should be set aside to give Brandstater some experience. That transition has to start somewhere and according to your stats Washington is the perfect test site.
I know this isn’t popular, but we can not win with a QB that is not comfortable throwing any pass that is more than twelve yards pass the line of scrimmage. We may beat Washington (they are in dire straights), but we still have Indy, Philly, NYG, the dolts, and a KC team capable of winning with their defense.
If McDaniels can’t see that Orton is the problem, we just may miss the playoffs.
Guardian of the Gate to La La Land!
Gonsoulin, Taylor, Little, Wright, Gradishar, Atwater, Davis, and Sharpe...
Why are they not in the Hall...I just don't understand.
by Mike Clark on Nov 11, 2009 6:39 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
A running game ....
would make a 12 yard offense become a 25 yard offense.
by Hank44 on Nov 11, 2009 7:17 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
After the first few games the league thought we had a running game--and we did. Bucky lead the league in yards per carry at that point.
We caught the league by surprise—but the league has caught up with us. Orton is not our answer and I hope McDaniels makes the change this week. Washington is a great proving ground for a new QB.
Guardian of the Gate to La La Land!
Gonsoulin, Taylor, Little, Wright, Gradishar, Atwater, Davis, and Sharpe...
Why are they not in the Hall...I just don't understand.
by Mike Clark on Nov 11, 2009 8:32 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm sorry but ...
Any coach that would make a quarterback change right now would not be much of a coach.
First, it is not like there is a proven commodity at back-up. The fascination with Simms and Brandstater and the desire to “see what we got” and provide a “proving ground” basically says the season is lost. (There are currently 5 teams at 6-2. Denver is one of them and they have beaten 3 and lost to the 4th. Not a bad record.) Second, you would be telling every player on the team that you have a very low level of patience. You will run from every quick fix that you think is out there – and a majority of them won’t work. While most “quick fixes” sound intriguing they are usually a very bad practice. Try doing it at your place of employment and see what happens. That is a tactic used at jobs that you can easily turn over personnel – NFL quarterbacks do have a limited supply. You will soon have players looking over their shoulder rather than looking at their opponent. Third, you are saying that the reason for the problems rest with that one player. Just a casual observation says that there are some real problems that exist in the running game and offensive line.
I tend to believe that Josh McDaniels makes his decision regarding QB based on a whole lot more than what you see in a game on Sunday. I think he attends practices (shock). I think he looks at more than the QB. I think he is involved in picking the brain of his QBs. I think he has pretty good insight. I also think he is probably the kind of guy that will not divorce his wife over a couple of rough spots because there is another woman who just might need to prove herself as a suitable alternative.
It is interesting that “we caught the league by surprise”. That is said as if that is the reason we won. We caught the prognosticators by surprise. They are not the same as the league. You also said “thought we had a running game – and we did.” You seem to give the running backs far more slack then you are giving Orton.
I don’t think any line-up changes are particularly necessary (including the running game). I think the offense has struggled against two very good defenses … just like some other quarterbacks have struggled against Denver this year.
by Hank44 on Nov 12, 2009 6:32 AM MST up reply actions 2 recs
That was a beautiful reply, Hank, and deserves a Rec.
- Jason
I gather speed by you f***ing with me - EV
by jubei on Nov 12, 2009 7:45 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Mike, I know from Day One you haven't been an Orton booster, so I hear your views loud and clear
Tommy Brandstater is an unknown quantity at this point and I would hate to do to Orton what happened to Plummer. Mike, you would have to admit that McDaniels is closer to the situation that the two of us, and he would know better than we if Brandstater gives Denver a better chance to win games. Wouldn’t you agree with this assessment?
I can’t see missing the playoffs, mate. They need 4 more wins to get it done. WAS, KC, KC, OAK at a minimum and they are in. They only have to play .500 from here on out. Mike do you really think they will go 3-5 in the next 8 games? Even if they did, they would be 9-7 and in the Wild Card chase.
"Wait, let me explain something to you...I'm the Dude. So, that's what you call me. You know, that, or 'His Dudeness,' or 'Duder,' or 'El Duderino,' if you're not into the whole brevity thing."
by TJ Johnson on Nov 11, 2009 9:43 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
McD
He sees that the problem is NOT Orton but rather the Oline and supporting crew. You must be joking about putting Brandstater in. No NFL game experience. Throwing Orton under the bus after two games lost because of other players is beyond comprehension.
by Endzone on Nov 11, 2009 10:43 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
DUDE I HAVE TO AGREE WITH MC & THE 12 YARD OFFENSE.
GREAT READ AS ALWAYS.
I normally choose to just observe & read then digest a little. This is way to vanilla of an offense with absolutely zero possibility for any yac. There seems to be in my minds eye no fluidity whatsoever. I don’t believe it is all on the offense either. The common theme the last 2 games and especially so Monday night was the spread offense / hurry-up /no-huddle. After the return for the TD, the steelers spread the field and went into their version of the no-huddle. Turn out the lights my friends!!! We have been no match for this kind of war-fare. Two plays stick out in my mind, Stoke coming up short on the third down and the JG debacle that was ruled no catch. Stokes play bothered me because it seems like this happens to often. Maybe it was just me but it didn’t seem like the proper route was run and then the effort was just not there to get to the sticks.
I harken back to a most important game played a couple of years ago against the 49ers and a fumble by Tatum Bell that to this day leaves me dumb-founded. As he was going down it appeared as though he just dropped the ball. I watched it over and over and never saw the strip slash hit that would have caused the fumble other than Tatum’s sense of self-preservation. Why do I bring this up now, you might ask. Although we may have gotten jobbed by the zebras. Once again I found myself watching a play over and over again trying to determine what caused JG to lose das pigskin and frankly I did not see. Is it just me or does somebody have another take.
It is my sincerest hope that we take care of business this Sunday & put the Dolts to bed the following Sunday. Go Broncs!!!!
by Terry8377 on Nov 11, 2009 7:28 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
Terry, the gaffney call did seem wrong to me, but since the call on the field was made...
it was going to take overwhelming evidence.
The no-huddle continues to be a concern for sure. It keeps Denver from getting a good zone blitz and stops them from rotating in Reid et. all.
This is the same vanilla offense that broke NFL records in 2007. I’m having trouble as well.
"Wait, let me explain something to you...I'm the Dude. So, that's what you call me. You know, that, or 'His Dudeness,' or 'Duder,' or 'El Duderino,' if you're not into the whole brevity thing."
by TJ Johnson on Nov 11, 2009 9:49 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

by 































