Horse Tracks 11/11/09 - Ryan Harris likely to miss Sunday's game in Washington, possibly more
by Douglas A. Lee on Nov 11, 2009 5:34 AM MST
in Horse Tracks
138 comments
DB - Weekly Press Release Notes - Patrick Smyth
DP - Broncos Mailbag: Season-ticket holders shouldn't be traitors - Mike Klis
"This year's Denver defense will continue to keep games competitive until the Broncos get another lucky bounce or the offense gets out of its rut. "
DPP - Broncos need ground game to avoid imbalance - Anthony Cotton
"Washington ranks sixth in the NFL in total defense (286 yards per game), three spots behind the Broncos, and just one behind Pittsburgh. It is also the ninth-stingiest team to score against, allowing 19.2 points per contest."
DPP - Broncos coach McDaniels: "No shortcuts" to improving running game - Mike Klis
"Right tackle Ryan Harris is expected to miss his second consecutive game Sunday when the Broncos play at Washington. Harris suffered a dislocated right big toe — not two small toes as previously reported — Nov. 1 at Baltimore... the Broncos have 14 takeaways in eight games. They had 13 takeaways in 16 games last year. The Broncos also reached the halfway point with 26 sacks. They had 26 sacks all of last season."
DPP - Broncos must play like leader - Jeff Legwold
"The Redskins come into the game 24th in the NFL in rushing offense and are likely to be without running back Clinton Portis."
DPP - Q&A: Time for Broncos QB switch? - Jeff Legwold
"Jay Cutler couldn't win down the stretch last year without a reliable running attack that stressed the defense, and neither will Orton. Cutler threw more than 600 passes last year, went down the field as much as people seem to always want from the Broncos and put up plenty of gaudy numbers — and the Broncos didn't go to the playoffs. So it isn't how far the passes are thrown. It's when they are thrown and what else the defense thinks you can do once you break the huddle."
DPP - Analysis: Law looks fine in Denver debut - Jeff Legwold
"The Broncos have plenty of teams left on the schedule that can stress a defense with three or four wide receivers on the field, most notably the Chargers, Giants, Colts and Eagles. So working out of the nickel is going to be important."
NFP - Tavern talk: McDaniels manages the game well - Mike Lombardi
I don't know if Lombardi reads ST&NO, but he covers McD's pre-halftime clock management much in the same way Ted did several weeks ago...
DPP - Broncos undone again by run defense vs. Steelers - Jeff Legwold
UPDATE 1:05PM ET - DP - Paige: Give Chris Simms the start at QB vs. Redskins
Oh my. Thanks to JeffG for catching this one...
LTC - Chargers climbing while Denver dives - Brian Howell
LTC - Interceptions doom Denver in loss to Steelers - Brian Howell
CSG - Lack of deep passing game keeps Broncos grounded - Frank Schwab
AP - Broncos say there's no panic after another loss - Pat Graham
KDVR - Denver Broncos still look OK even after loss to Pittsburgh Steelers - Chris Tanaka
INDT - Drew Litton: Denver Broncos No Shows
Redskins News
WP - Denver Broncos' gallop slows to a trot - Mark Maske
WP - Redskins even struggle at showing heart - Tracee Hamilton
WP - Portis unsure if he'll play Sunday - Rick Maese
WP - Sooner or later, Portis's health must be addressed - Jason Reid
WP - Campbell maintains upbeat attitude - Jason Reid & Rick Maese
WP - Mounting injuries are taking a toll - Jason Reid & Rick Maese
AFC West News
NFL - Johnson clears waivers, becomes a free agent
NFP - Diner morning news: Chiefs acted too late - Mike Lombardi
NFP - Chiefs hoping for help on L.J. contract - Andrew Brandt
KCS - Johnson tells radio show he'd like to return to Chiefs someday - Kent Babb
FH - Bernard Pollard Accuses Chiefs of Trying To Have Him Blackballed - Knox Bardeen
SDUT - Norv knows emotion - Nick Canepa
SDUT - Chargers' defensive improvement a matter of trust - Chris Jenkins
FH - As Raider Nation Turns: Latest on Cable - Chris Burke
OT - Will Oakland Raiders fans be next to step up and be heard? - Monte Poole
NFL News
NFL - Browns place LB Barton on injured reserve
NFL - Appeals court: Vick can keep $16M in roster bonuses from Falcons
CBS - Q&A: Under fire, Mangini opens up about Browns, Quinn, Belichick - Clark Judge
Well...this is a very long, but interesting read. I learned that Eric Mangini is an intelligent, well-spoken and probably good person. However, I didn't learn much about him as a coach. It was disappointing to not see any Spygate questions, or perhaps one about the $1700 water bottle fine...
NFL Opinion
USAT - Not pretty, just Ben: QB's quiet confidence powering Steelers - Jarrett Bell
SI - MMQB Mailbag: Chiefs make right call on Johnson; how to fix Bears - Peter King
NFP - Returning to Quinn provides no hope for Browns - Matt Bowen
Y! - Freeney leads rush for defensive honors - Mike Silver
NFL - With these guys, there's no such thing as a good backup plan - Vic Carucci
NFP - A win for Vick, a loss for the NFL - Robert Boland
Midseason Awards, Etc.
SI - NFL Midseason Report: 2009 - Don Banks
SI - 2009 NFL Predictions for second half of season - Jim Trotter
"It's easy to say "Told You So" after consecutive defeats, but take a look at their remaining schedule."
SI - NFL Midseason All-Pro Team, Awards - Peter King
Y! - Second-half intrigue: Boys-Saints game looms - Jason Cole
"The Broncos and coach Josh McDaniels have been a great story this season, but I just don’t trust what I’m seeing...That 6-0 start could quite easily become a 10-6 finish, if not worse."
FOX - Schein 9: Peyton heads first-half award winners
FOX - Preseason's no-brainer picks didn't pan out - Kevin Hench
"The consensus was as fast and ruthless as it was wrong. It went like this. 1) Jay Cutler was the one player on the Broncos McDaniels could not alienate. 2) Kyle Orton was a huge downgrade from Cutler. 3) McDaniels will be the latest Bill Belichick disciple to fail spectacularly. Oh-for-three."
NFL - Handing out some first-half hardware of the unusual kind - Jason La Canfora
PFW - Colts lead PFW's Midseason All-Pro team - Keith Schleiden
SN - The Designed Rush, Week 10: Time for Meaningless Midseason Awards! - Michael Tunison
Power Rankings, Etc.
NYT - Week 9 Passer Ratings: Orton Seeks His Level - Luis DeLoureiro
ESPN - NFL Power Rankings Week 10
CBS - Power Rankings: No joke -- Bengals are serious contenders - Pete Prisco
FOX - NFL Power Rankings - Adrian Hasenmayer
FH - NFL Power Rankings, Week 10: The Ugly Side of Parity - Josh Alper
0 recs |
138 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Thanks Doug
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 5:55 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
Thanks Doug
Real Power, comes with the realization that One cannot change the Moment;
only ones perception of it: Atitude! JQM
by UB3 on Nov 11, 2009 6:38 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
Thanks Doug.
It seems like we’ve already talked about all of these things the last few days………….. the abundance of steeler fans………the need of the running game…….offensive line woes……….
MHR is ahead of the game.
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
by kentuckybronco on Nov 11, 2009 7:26 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
Thanks Doug
Character may be manifested in the great moments but it is made in the small ones -- Philip Brooks
by KaptainKirk on Nov 11, 2009 7:31 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
The Bears D looked really bad on Sunday and I don’t think they will reach 8-8. If they finish 7-9 (looking at the schedule that seems about right) we will be picking around 15th in round 1. That is a great place to have a 1st round pick because the financial guarantees are not absurd like Top 7 picks, but you still land a premier player that you don’t usually see around pick 25. I think the teens is a great place to be drafting in the current broken draft process that punishes the very worst teams. A pick around 15 in a top heavy draft of 5-star prospects may also hold A TON of trade value.
The past two games have exposed some obvious talent deficiencies on the Broncos (interior O-line, punter and to a lesser extent Hagen and McBean). At 15 and with several QBs expected to go in the top 10, we may see some great defensive players drop that would otherwise be Top 10 picks.
While I’m not as high on Orton as most at MHR, I miss Cutler less and less each week. I am still not on board with the Alphonso Smith deal, but the Cutler trade gives me a lot of perspective that I (McGeorge and the MSM) need to trust that the Broncos know a hell of a lot more about what they are doing than I do. At least for me, it’s very comforting. Maybe not so much for Woody Paige and pals.
Side note: I know McDaniels was clearly outcoached in the last two games, but my eyes tell me he will be a very good NFL football coach. His command of clock management and situational awareness is incredible for such a young coach. He has also proven to have an ability to make adjustments on the fly and during half time. Like height in basketball, these traits are not something you learn. You’re born with quick wit or you’re not.
This is my favorite website.
by McGeorge on Nov 11, 2009 8:56 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
i know we disagreed on the game thread about McDaniels clock management (or at least i was confused by the decision making)
@ the end of the first half…and i wonder if you still feel the way you felt then…hindsight being 20/20 and everything.
i still think when you are playing the defending Super Bowl champions, down by 4 points, and have a chance to put some points on the board you have to go for it and play to win, rather than play it safe (not to lose), but you had me convinced on the game thread i was wrong…but here we are today and i’m still not sure.
do you still feel the same way ? if so, how come ?
by Jenna Talia on Nov 11, 2009 9:05 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I say you are right when you say go for it and play to win.
You saw what happened when you play to “not lose”. Giants vs. Chargers.
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
by kentuckybronco on Nov 11, 2009 9:06 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I know you weren't asking me, Jenna, but that's my two cents. lol
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
by kentuckybronco on Nov 11, 2009 9:07 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
i'd change being right for a win
but since we lost i’m sort of hoping i was right ; )
by Jenna Talia on Nov 11, 2009 9:21 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
lol, fair enough.
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
by kentuckybronco on Nov 11, 2009 9:25 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I liked how McD handled it heading into halftime. Just to go over the facts, they did try to throw on first down, but Orton took a sack. This left them at 2nd and 12, and they once again threw (screen to Buckhalter). This left Denver at 3rd and 13 at their own 40, which is a down and distance they were highly unlikely to convert. 3rd and 13 is not only unlikely to be converted, but there’s a great chance for a big INT. Then what?
The way I saw it (and I presume McD felt this way, judging by actions) at the time was that the Broncos were the better team in the first half, and to go into halftime down 7-3 was acceptable. Had Pittsburgh gotten the ball back and tacked on a FG and made it 10-3, that’s a big difference in my mind – making it a touchdown advantage, giving the Steelers momentum and then the ball to start the second half. If they were to score again then, now we’re looking at a 10- or 14-point game. Yikes.
Me, I was happy with being down 7-3 at halftime and thinking (erroneously) that the Broncos would recapture their second-half magic ala their previous games (excepting Baltimore, of course).
formerly known around these parts as nycbroncosfan
by Douglas A. Lee on Nov 11, 2009 9:26 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
well poo
i had a sneaking suspicion that i wasn’t right, now i’m almost convinced, thx again Mr NYC !
i still wish we had more confidence as fans with our offense…and our head coach could help us with that !
by Jenna Talia on Nov 11, 2009 9:34 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Jenna
I think we all wish we could have stormed down the field and scored and showed the Steelers “We are the Broncos, we aren’t intimidated” but I felt at that time McDaniels thought the wheels could come off and he wanted us to go into the locker room, assess where we were and how we could do more. Unfortunately, the Steelers did a much better job than we did.
Now we have to learn from that and beat the teams in front of us and prepare to meet the Steelers in the playoffs.
I would hope you would support who we are. Not, who we are not. Coach Norman Dale "Hoosiers"
by dmitchell624 on Nov 11, 2009 1:39 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
oh so i went and read this article and now i'm still not sure
http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Tavern-talk-McDaniels-manages-the-game-well.html
on the one hand the article has me convinced that McDaniels is a genius, but…
this comment from one of the readers is sort of how i feel
Yatrix, I get the point, I just don’t always agree with it. Every game has an ebb and flow to it. The Broncos dominated the 1st half by throwing the ball underneath and opposite of Troy P’s side of the ball. Yet they were going to go into half time down by 4. If you don’t trust your QB who had only thrown 2 interceptions all season and you don’t trust your D which is one of the top ranked units, when do you trust them? I think his play calling spoke volumes to his team , which promptly went out and laid an egg in the 2nd half. If the score was reversed then I have no problem with this strategy.
by Jenna Talia on Nov 11, 2009 9:39 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
There is a very big difference...
between trusting your defense and taking an unnecessary risk that is
1) unlikely to be successful
2) giving the other team an extra possession and chance to score
formerly known around these parts as nycbroncosfan
by Douglas A. Lee on Nov 11, 2009 10:06 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
For some statistical backing...
Including that 3rd-and-13 play, the Broncos are now 14-of-48 in converting 3rd downs of 6 yards and longer. When facing 3rd and 11 or longer, they’re 1-for-13 in converting.
Just to be clear, these are pretty normal numbers. No teams are good at converting 3rd and long – this is not Broncos-specific. My point is to clarify how unlikely it is to convert on 3rd and 13, no matter what play you call. So, what we’re looking at is a shot-in-the-dark throw on 3rd and long which more likely than a conversion results in an incompletion and clock stoppage, or in a worse case an INT. Me, I don’t like those odds…
formerly known around these parts as nycbroncosfan
by Douglas A. Lee on Nov 11, 2009 10:17 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I think no matter what we see on TV, discuss here, or even chat during the games
McDaniels and his coaching staff are looking at things we cant possibly see with our limited vantage point and camera angles. There is an ebb and flow to a game…….there is also many other things coaches have to take into account.
I trust McDaniels. Let’s face it. If someone told us right after the Cutler trade we would be 6-2, facing the Redskins and having not played the Chiefs yet or the 2nd Raider game, we would have signed on immediately!
I would hope you would support who we are. Not, who we are not. Coach Norman Dale "Hoosiers"
by dmitchell624 on Nov 11, 2009 10:16 AM MST up reply actions 5 recs
Rec'd that comment, dm
Moreno/Buckhalter in '09
by Emmett Smith on Nov 11, 2009 11:51 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
thanks
I really appreciate that
I would hope you would support who we are. Not, who we are not. Coach Norman Dale "Hoosiers"
by dmitchell624 on Nov 11, 2009 1:33 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
lol, of course, they are more knowledgable than us fans
But this is what is fun about football; we can be arm-chair coaches and QB’s, sipping on our Miller Lites, yet strategizing how to take down a 3-4 Hairfence… er, I mean, Defense.
by tunga77 on Nov 11, 2009 12:07 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Sure, my friend
However – many of the questions that are jumping out of the woodwork are based in that lack of understanding of the game. Just in my own experience – when I started on MHR, I was here mostly to read all of the archives that HT/Steve had written. In a short time, I realized that my questions were often the wrong question, and that tendency was based in my own lack of understanding of the game. I generally changed to asking why a certain thing was done, rather than suggesting that I knew a better approach. I have to say – it was humbling to find out how little I know. It still is, of course ;-) But asking why tended to get me farther than making suggestions that turned out to be vaporware.
Any way that you enjoy something is just fine, of course, This isn’t aimed at claiming that your comments aren’t perfectly appropriate – they are! But the reasons why things aren’t different are very telling, evn so.
Moreno/Buckhalter in '09
by Emmett Smith on Nov 11, 2009 12:36 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
Ok, thanks... I was just about to respond below, being a little pissed off
at you for expressing the “McD knows better” mantra… that IMO we see a little too much…
I hope I am one of those fans who comes off as having an open mind, b/c I think I am. I would like to learn more of the X’s and O’s of football and that is why this site is great.
At the same time, and I think challenging the status quo is something that is valuable. Some of us may not be as knowledgeable as you, or HT, or Styg, but we may have decent ideas. Take for example… Bill Walsh… was he not challenging the status quo when he brought around the WCO?
Anyways, I’m still reading thru your old article… damn, it’s long… and good. Thanks for pointing me there…
by tunga77 on Nov 11, 2009 12:43 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
lol - Yes, anything worth covering is worth covering in excruciating detail...
Or so the tech writer in me believes.
Your point on Bill Walsh actually makes mine, I suspect. Walsh broke the status quo by being incredibly well-versed in the game and seeing a possibility via experiential analysis.
On the other point – sure, conversation is great and ideas are always welcome. Please do challenge assumptions! I just hope that you won’t take offense if it turns out that there are reasons why things are X rather than Y.
Moreno/Buckhalter in '09
by Emmett Smith on Nov 11, 2009 12:55 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Not at all my friend...
But please, people need to stop with the “McDaniels knows more than you” mantra. That is starting to become a pet peeve of mine. He does know more than me, I have zero doubt about that. That’s part of the reason he makes 7 figures and I make 5.
But it’s conversation killer and this is what this site is all about… football conversation and lively debates.
by tunga77 on Nov 11, 2009 1:03 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Sure - let's put it differently
McD does, in fact, and folks really do start in on the “He really ought to…”. Usually, the reasons are available. My only suggestion is to change that to “I wonder why he doesn’t…” which will get more answers that bear on the situation, rather than only speculation.
Moreno/Buckhalter in '09
by Emmett Smith on Nov 11, 2009 1:26 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
you said that with your eyes ;-)
I would hope you would support who we are. Not, who we are not. Coach Norman Dale "Hoosiers"
by dmitchell624 on Nov 11, 2009 1:50 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
you said Hairfence
I was joking about the Polumalu commercials
I would hope you would support who we are. Not, who we are not. Coach Norman Dale "Hoosiers"
by dmitchell624 on Nov 11, 2009 5:25 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Ah, sorry, didn't remember that part of the commercial
Sad… missed the return shot on my own joke. ;)
by tunga77 on Nov 12, 2009 9:45 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Also...
There are cases where NFL coaches may not necessarily be smarter than us…
See: Magini, Eric. hehe. ;)
by tunga77 on Nov 11, 2009 12:12 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Norv Turner. The exception that proves the rule. lol
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
by kentuckybronco on Nov 11, 2009 12:23 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
heehee, yes... i'll add a few more potential exceptions:
any coach that Al Davis or Dan Schneider employs. ;)
by tunga77 on Nov 11, 2009 12:28 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I have a hammer thats smarter than Norv Turner or Eric Mangini
I would hope you would support who we are. Not, who we are not. Coach Norman Dale "Hoosiers"
by dmitchell624 on Nov 11, 2009 1:51 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
If these walls could talk, they'd say "This is a magical place."
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
by kentuckybronco on Nov 11, 2009 2:55 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
me 2
wish i could make it green !
by Jenna Talia on Nov 11, 2009 5:23 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I have become very concerned with our utter distain with trying to throw down the field.
Maybe the O-line was not as good as it was last season, but there were 10+ dropbacks vs. Pitt where the protection was excellent and Orton had all day to throw. It is inaccurate to say Orton had no time to throw deep. Yes he did. Not always, but he did on numerous occasions. I didn’t see us even attempt anything over the top. Vs Pitt, I don’t think we took any shots 15+ down the field.
The NFL is a big play league and you do not win in the NFL without big plays. Our offense is not going for any big plays right now and the 10 total points they have scored in the last two games is a direct result of this.
BTW, 7 of those 10 points were scored because we got a 41 yard PI call on Foxworth. This was our only big offensive play in the past two weeks. Maybe the only one we even attempted.
Orton doesn’t have a rocket arm, but he does have an adequate NFL arm to throw down the field once in a while.
It will help to find a running game for play action purposes, but no long pass attempts in a game where you QB throws 30+ times? Well, it doesn’t take a genius for the D to pick up on this and adjust accordingly, which both Balt and Pitt did with great success.
This is my favorite website.
by McGeorge on Nov 11, 2009 10:58 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
BShrout's Article "To Throw..."
He posts good stats to show that we ARE throwing the long pass attempts.
by Endzone on Nov 11, 2009 11:02 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Not in the last two weeks. Unless you consider a 10 yard pass going deep.
This is my favorite website.
by McGeorge on Nov 11, 2009 12:45 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I understand
There is a lot of that feeling right now. In this morning’s press conference, both Orton and McD dealt with that. What fan’s cannot see is that the coverage often dictates whether or not you try those throws. Of course Orton can make the throws (the arguments to the contrary have been flimsy at best). I would like to see more of them also, but the Broncos have unanimously stated that they take them when they are there. I would tend to believe them – they’re been pretty up-front in how they handle problems.
I also have to admit – The year’s stats have Orton at or above average in making long throws, so perhaps some of the rhetoric is somewhat overstated.
Moreno/Buckhalter in '09
by Emmett Smith on Nov 11, 2009 11:55 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes but...
What about the business concept of a “loss leader” in this scenario?
Against the Steelers, we were not getting the short game done. Sure, you take what the defense gives you, but when that defense is only giving you a 3-yard pass play on a 3rd and 12, what does that really gain us?
In this situation, IMO, take a shot! Play it safe… overthrow the receiver ever so slightly, to the outside shoulder, where if he can’t make the catch, nobody can. So, worst case, it’s an incompletion… but aren’t there unseen benefits to this???
So nonw, hypothetically-speaking, I’m the DB that covered that receiver (e.g., Eddie). Next time, he comes on the field, do I not have that a voice whispering ever so quietly in my head, “ok, watch out for the fly route, Tunga”, such that I back off slightly from the line this time?
by tunga77 on Nov 11, 2009 12:02 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
There's two assumption here
The first is that the plays that are incompletions aren’t pretty much what you described. As viewer, that’s not something that we can tell. I can say this – if you know that, it’s better than even odds that McD does too, you know?
The second assumption has to do with how you implement the offense. Bill Walsh, for example, would say that yes, you do go with the shorter completion. Why? Because each completion unnerves that defense a little more and that effect is cumulative throughout the game. Fans are always focused on the immediate, but NFL coaches are not. They tend to view the game as a whole and will use plays early in the game to set up implementation of things that they want to do later. Sadly, the fanbase seems unaware of this which leads to a lot of the comments tht are made being utterly off-base.
Moreno/Buckhalter in '09
by Emmett Smith on Nov 11, 2009 12:30 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree McG
I went back and watched the highlights from NFL.com… and I saw several plays where Orton had 3+ seconds to throw. Granted he also had several plays where he had very little time, I am also in the boat that we need to take some shots downfield to open up things underneath.
I think the problem might not have been that KO didn’t have any time at all, but rather the line was too inconsistent. Good on some plays, bad on others. From that perspective, I can somewhat understand some hesitation to dial-up a deep pass (for fear of of a sack, turnover, etc).
However… from my perspective this is a poor way to call plays, if that is indeed what kept us from doing so. It’s exactly like “playing not to lose” rather than “playing to win” (see: Coughlin, Tom).
In any case, I can totally get on board with the idea that we need to tighten things up on the OL (better and more consistent play), get the running game going again, get on a roll, and then hopefully the deeper passes will come naturally.
As the cliche says, everything starts up front…
If we can’t get these things going… we are going to start losing more games to tough nasty defenses. And in that case, I say we have no choice but to go deep every so often even with weaker line play… what do we have to lose?
by tunga77 on Nov 11, 2009 11:57 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
the thing is
And Emmett just basically stated this above, one thing you will almost never see Orton do is throw into double coverage. This is coming from the coaching. One of the most base philosophies this team is running on is that if we don’t turn the ball over and execute, we will score. Furthermore, our turnover margin is bound to be positive if we protect the ball correctly, and that will give us even easier chances to score when we force turnovers.
So chucking the ball into double coverage for the sake of “taking shots down field” just isn’t going to happen very much, and that is why. In all reality, however, we ARE passing the ball down field. It just isn’t the crux of our offense, we aren’t a vertical offense like we’ve seen from San Diego where they repeatedly make deep attempts to try and “open up” the rest of the field. It’s a schematic and philosophical basis of our offense, so if you want it otherwise, I’m sorry but I don’t think it’s going to happen.
Gaffney and Scheffler both have 12.7 yards per catch, tied for second behind Stokely who has 18.5 yards per catch, but only 10 catches with one pretty amazing one that helped skew his stats a bit. Gaffney has (by far IMO) been the most consistent deep threat on our team this year.
Marshall hasn’t been a down field deep threat, he is actually functioning exactly as many expected him too in this offense: catch the ball in the short to intermediate range and use his ridiculous size/speed juxtaposition to gain YAC, and he has performed marvelously at this—see the Dallas game, Pittsburgh game, NWE game for great examples of this. When he has gone for long balls he has failed. He started the season not playing much, and his first deep chance of the year went directly through his hands. I just watched a clip from SD game where he got a deep ball actually thrown into bracket coverage (Cromartie over the top, SS under) with the ball thrown high as you suggest. He jumped but couldn’t catch it. There was the Baltimore PI call against Foxworth, where Marshall didn’t get the pass but at least managed to get a fairly questionable call made for him. There was another play, a playaction with a great pass on a post route, the DB jumped to defense the pass and Marshall did not gain separation or go up and get it.
Scheffler (see TD vs. SD for a great example) and Gaffney (made at least one deep catch in Baltimore game) HAVE shown success in catching deep balls, and I think they will continue to get the lion’s share of these not-so-common occurences. Until Marshall can prove he can get the deep ball like Fitz and Moss, he’s not going to just have many balls chucked at him deep (like in NWE with Moss…).
Jason
The Hanging Curve
by poorboywilly on Nov 11, 2009 12:27 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks, Jason
I appreciate the commentary – you’re exactly right. As Orton and McD mentioned in today’s conference – you don’t throw where a player is well-covered. It’s a low-benefit, high-risk approach that is completely out of phase with the offense that we run.
Moreno/Buckhalter in '09
by Emmett Smith on Nov 11, 2009 12:32 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
But 10 points in 8 quarters strongly suggests our approach or strategy in those two games was not a good strategy.
If McDaniels and Orton knew the best strategy to be successful in the past two games, they would have employed such a strategy. The strategy they did employ was the wrong one. Offensively, we were terrible in the past two games.
If we play either of those two teams in the playoffs, we will have to try something much different than what McDaniels schemed the past two weeks. It is very fair to criticize the game play from both losses. Those games were not that close. Our D held up just fine. But offensively, we got destroyed in both games.
This is my favorite website.
by McGeorge on Nov 11, 2009 12:41 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Slight disagreement
You’re confusing strategy with tactics (my old martial training comes in…). Our strategy is much the same as the Pats was when NE set records in 2007. That isn’t the issue.
Tactics and execution are the problems. There’s a huge difference there. Your last comment is precisely right – we need different tactics if we play those teams. We also need far better execution by all positions.
However, there’s also an assumption here that I disagree with. In one offseason, you can’t fix all the things that were wrong with this team. Our O line has gone unexpectedly south in several ways and that has killed us. Olsen may be a good addition, but few rookies really contribute that well on the O line – they usually sit for a year. With Hamilton’s melt-down, that may have to change, but playing Olsen is a long way from optimal. he hasn’t had the reps with the 1st team that are necessary for communication and timing, and that can only come with time. We have also lost Harris, who is an all Pro level player in my estimation. Wiegmann is showing his age and Lichtensteiger wasn’t working out. Hamilton was our fall-back position for Wiegmann, so we’re in deep kimchi.
Fans don’t like it, but the fact is that the Steelers are just plain better than us right now. Sometimes you lose to a better team – I take my hat off to them.
Moreno/Buckhalter in '09
by Emmett Smith on Nov 11, 2009 12:51 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
I don't think
it is any small coincidence that Harris left just after the start of the second quarter in Baltimore, and we have but in our worst two offensive games of the season with him out (great defenses of Bal and Pitt are no small coincidence either). Get this: we recorded 39 rushing yards (10 attempts) in the Baltimore game before Harris left, and only 27 on 9 more attempts after he left. We all know the Pittsburgh game without Harris we had another grand 27 yards of rushing on 14 attempts. Since Harris is out, 54 yards on 23 attempts for 2.3 ypc.
Like I said, world-class defenses also help factor in there, but I think your assessment of Harris as All-Pro is spot-on.
Jason
The Hanging Curve
by poorboywilly on Nov 11, 2009 1:00 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
Fully agreed
The frustrating thing about the Baltimore game is that they did establish the run early on.
by Chibronx on Nov 11, 2009 2:09 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
That is an EXTREMELY important point, Em
Thanks for the reminder, as it’s very easy to lose sight of the fact that McD and Co. are in their first year of business, and only a year ago the Broncos allowed 448 points last year. As for the offense, everyone talks about 22 ppg (the number pre-Baltimore) being a poor number, but the 2008 Broncos only scored 23.1 ppg.
We all need to remember that this is only Year One of McDaniels’ tenure in Denver, and that things should only get better with each passing offseason that brings in new players to create a renewable franchise in Josh’s image.
formerly known around these parts as nycbroncosfan
by Douglas A. Lee on Nov 11, 2009 1:03 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not complaining about the first 6 weeks
I couldn’t be more happier with the results. But I want the Broncos to win each hand every week and when we get our butts handed to us two weeks in a row, even to two playoff-caliber teams, I still get worried and want to discuss ways the Broncos can get better!
You can get better year after year, but hopefully you can get better within the year, as well.
by tunga77 on Nov 11, 2009 1:09 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
As guys like Clady, Ryan Harris, Orton, Royal, Kuper, Scheff, Elvis and Marshall are due new contracts, it will not be easy to sign FAs.
Denver is in a very good spot in 2008 – 2009 because most of our awesome players are on their rookie deals. All these guys will get more expensive very soon.
This is my favorite website.
by McGeorge on Nov 11, 2009 1:38 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah we will have a boatload of people to sign shortly
tough decisions ahead
I would hope you would support who we are. Not, who we are not. Coach Norman Dale "Hoosiers"
by dmitchell624 on Nov 11, 2009 1:40 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
And we won’t be able to get better by signing a bunch of FAs. Not that this is a bad thing BTW.
We will get better as players improve year to year and if we draft well. As Emmett Smith has pointed out, the Steelers are still much better than us so I hope we can draft well and guys can develop the way Elvis has. I’ve seen huge improvements in DJ Williams, Elvis, Peterson, Woodyard and even Marcus Thomas. I have seen no improvements in Marshall or Scheff and regression with Royal & Hillis (whom both looked like potential All-Pros last season). This really bothers me.
I’m not overly thrilled with the 2009 draft class to date. Ayers is coming on and I like McBath, but Moreno and Smith have been disappointing and Quinn is being deactivated. It’s too early for labels other than “come on rookies, let’s get going”.
This is my favorite website.
by McGeorge on Nov 11, 2009 1:52 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
It is interesting the different speeds that players absorb the NFL and some never do.
I hope ours grasp it soon.
I would hope you would support who we are. Not, who we are not. Coach Norman Dale "Hoosiers"
by dmitchell624 on Nov 11, 2009 1:53 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
We scored three points in a home game. Are the Steelers that much better? Our tactics were all wrong vs Baltimore and were not adjusted to for a similar game/defense just one week later. Why? Why were we not more prepared out of the bye and why did we not adjust after the first loss. 7 total points to just 3 total points? That’s awful.
I guess we are in deep kimchi.
This is my favorite website.
by McGeorge on Nov 11, 2009 1:35 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Fair question
Are the Steelers that much better?
Yep
Moreno/Buckhalter in '09
by Emmett Smith on Nov 11, 2009 1:37 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
That sucks.
This is my favorite website.
by McGeorge on Nov 11, 2009 1:39 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
lol... that was kinda depressing...
Hopefully, the coaches and players don’t think that… =P
by tunga77 on Nov 11, 2009 3:25 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly...
I think some of you guys are misconstruing me and the other guys of wanting to go “Rex Grossman” on teams (aka: I see the TE open underneath, but whatever, eff it, I’m going deep).
What we are talking about is adjustments. Within games, but also within seasons!
I just finished reading your article Bear, and I understand most of what you’re saying… I think… but, when we play physical, nasty Defenses like Baltimore or Pittsburgh, or anyone in the playoffs, what do you do?
Both defenses seem to have effortlessly taken away our short game. So… do you keep hammering at it, hoping against hope that something that hasn’t worked all game, suddenly works? Do you say “eh, they’re better than us today, let’s just pack it in boys”? Or do you try to make some adjustments and sprinkle in a double-move, a bootleg, a Wild Horses (still hate that name)?
To my untrained eyes, it didn’t seem like we were willing to do that the last two weeks. And correct me if I’m wrong, but weren’t there a lot of regulars in the game thread saying similar things?
I think we’re beating a dead horse here. I understand your points, Bear, and I can see where you’re coming from, but hopefully you see some value in my points and McGeorge’s and others…
by tunga77 on Nov 11, 2009 12:59 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Extinct Equine time
lol
Moreno/Buckhalter in '09
by Emmett Smith on Nov 11, 2009 1:37 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Quick points, poorboy:
1) Again, I’m not saying we should go Rex Grossman on defenses… there are safer deep throws as well as the high risk ones. Go deep down the sideline, but have the QB place the ball on the outside shoulder where if the WR isn’t catching it, neither is the DB. If the QB sees it as too risky even then, put just a little extra uumf on it and send over the receiver/DB’s heads.
2) Marshall can be a deep threat; I’m not sure why you’re saying he can’t be. He was the successful target of the long ball many times over the last 2 seasons; I’m thinking of several catches against Chicago, KC, Cleveland, and Atlanta. I agree he’s no Larry Fitzgerald or Randy Moss, but he’s no slouch at the deep patterns either.
Anyways, I should get back to work, lol. I was thinking of just jumping on for a quick comment or two during lunch… and now it’s almost 2 hours later. Oops!!
Thanks for the fun debate guys!
by tunga77 on Nov 11, 2009 1:24 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
For what it's worth...
Randy Moss only has two catches on throws longer than 20 yards this year. He has 16 catches on passes thrown 11-20 yards downfield.
In contrast, Marshall has one catch on a throw longer than 20, while only 7 catches on balls thrown 11-20 yards.
formerly known around these parts as nycbroncosfan
by Douglas A. Lee on Nov 11, 2009 1:32 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
where did you get the stats BTW
I would love to delve into this further and see what it looked like for the last couple season too. Do you have attempts with those stats as well?
Jason
The Hanging Curve
by poorboywilly on Nov 11, 2009 1:39 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I was just looking on each player’s individual ESPN pages. Both players caught a lot more deep passes in previous years, whatever that means…
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/splits?playerId=9705
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/splits?playerId=1433
formerly known around these parts as nycbroncosfan
by Douglas A. Lee on Nov 11, 2009 1:48 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Dang - three comments in a row
Don’t you just hate it when the system doesn’t let you put them where you meant to. Bugs me no end…
Anyway – last point for the day – the arm is going south. No, we don’t really want to ‘change’ our game if we play BAL or PIT. We want to execute properly and win. Our execution is the real culprit, not the theory. We need to get better at what we do, and we have only been at this for a short time. PIT dominates for a lot of reasons, but if you watch carefully, they don’t change their strategy much – they just out-execute everyone else. Their basic strategy is fine, as is ours. Better team wins, and they did.
Marshall can be a long ball receiver IF and only if the long ball is there to be received. That mostly has to do with formation and coverages. Fans love to claim that what is impossible is really preferable, but I just can’t agree. All the specific suggestions that I’ve been reading today have been nice, but reality doesn’t work that way. There really are good reasons why those things won’t work, despite that being a buzz-kill for a lot of folks.
The specifics of which adaptations you use are dictated by what matchups you are and are not winning, their formations, and a half dozen other factors. It’s incredibly complicated, and without any superiority being talked about, the difficult fact is that there really ARE good reason why the Broncos are doing what they are. ‘Why don’t they do X’ is fine in degree, but seriously – we have to keep in mind that we don’t have access to the views of the field that will permit us to see the answers to most of those questions. That’s a big reason that folks are irritating some members by saying McD Knows More – unfortunately, it’s just true, and it’s mostly based on him having access to a ton of info that we don’t have and can’t get.
Moreno/Buckhalter in '09
by Emmett Smith on Nov 11, 2009 1:36 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes
there is a really good reason why the QB is looking at all those overhead stills after each drive. From our television angles we rarely even get to see the safeties once the play starts.
Jason
The Hanging Curve
by poorboywilly on Nov 11, 2009 1:43 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Ok, last post for the day for me too ;)
I’m ok with the execution vs strategy concept and will get onboard with that. Like I said, you guys seem to have a significantly better grasp of the finer details and seem to invest much more time (how do you find the time?!) reviewing tape, etc, so I’m on board the Bear train!
Just take my thoughts as suggestions for possible options in the future if a trend develops and we continue to struggle in the short passing game.
BTW, I think the system orders things correctly. Replies just get kind of hard to follow when there are lots of sub-comments and replies and also due to fairly small indentations.
by tunga77 on Nov 11, 2009 3:31 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Just catching up on all this
I tell you what…this right here, these great respectful debates and honest discussions in the comments…THIS is the meat and potatoes of MHR. Stellar stuff, all! Thanks!
+a gillion to all of them!
"Take what you can. Give nothing back!"
by Colorado_Kitten on Nov 11, 2009 4:14 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
rec'd
i feel like i might get smarter about football just hanging out on the periphery of these discussions
by Jenna Talia on Nov 11, 2009 5:16 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
get smarter about football ?
see even that sounds dumb. doh.
by Jenna Talia on Nov 11, 2009 5:17 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree Jenna
Sometimes it is better to lurk when these things happen. You never know what your gonna get.
Character may be manifested in the great moments but it is made in the small ones -- Philip Brooks
by KaptainKirk on Nov 12, 2009 12:47 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Ha... glad to be of help
Yes, I was just asking some questions and by doing so, I got smarter about football as well…. nothing wrong with that, Jenna!
by tunga77 on Nov 12, 2009 9:48 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh and thanks to Bear
For some fun lively discussion… good times… good times.
Is it Sunday yet?
by tunga77 on Nov 12, 2009 11:18 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the points
1) So we are agreed. No Grossman. :) I still posit that we are taking safe deep throws when they present themselves. I think your frustration may be stemming from the fact that it hasn’t really presented itself very often. This is mostly because the NFL by and large features two deep safeties. Most of the time a team tries to get by with one deep safety, they fail.
2) As Douglas just pointed out above, Marshall hasn’t caught many balls beyond even 10 yards this season. I don’t believe I said he CAN’T be a deep threat (and even if I did, I didn’t mean to), I’m saying he hasn’t shown very much success at it YET. He has shown tremendous success at turning short and intermediate throws into huge gains and TDs, and we continue to try and exploit this strength in his game.
Jason
The Hanging Curve
by poorboywilly on Nov 11, 2009 1:39 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, how I miss the Sex Cannon (see profile pic)
He was so frustrating to watch as a QB. =/
Quick hits again:
1) I’m not super frustrated atm… just making some suggestions on how I think we could possibly avoid another game like the last two. And also I’m not advocating that we suddenly switch to a Run & Shoot or the Greatest Show on Turf type offense… only that we have the occasional deep throw to make sure defenses respect that phase of our game. Right now, if I was a D-coordinator and I was game planning against the Broncos, I don’t think I would …
2) Regarding Marshall, I wasn’t referring to this year… but the previous 2 years. Just from memory, I believe he caught his fair share of 30+ yard passes.
by tunga77 on Nov 11, 2009 3:40 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
NYC describes exactly how I felt.
I’ll add that Pitt is a very good passing team with good WRs and a good QB. I think they had all their TOs left. I bet they are pretty dangerous in the two minute drill and McD didn’t want to find out. Being down 7-3 at the half when you D has allowed ZERO points is fine. The game is still clearly in the balance at that point. 10-3 or 14-3. Not so much.
I’ll also add that games are never ever won or lost in the final two minutes of the 1st half. We’ve been a good 2nd half team so why not wait until we have to let it all hang out to do so.
McDaniels clock management skills are far ahead of Shanny’s. Shanny was just so-so in this area and you could clearly lay several losses on his shoulders for poor clock management (A Colts game a few years ago at Investco jumps to mind, but there were many others). I don’t foresee this ever being a problem with McDaniels.
This is my favorite website.
by McGeorge on Nov 11, 2009 10:45 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
McGeorge
I am keep hoping we open things up too. I know McDaniels is pretty sharp, is he seeing or knowing something we don’t?
I would hope you would support who we are. Not, who we are not. Coach Norman Dale "Hoosiers"
by dmitchell624 on Nov 11, 2009 11:40 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I am keep? WOW
Sorry about that, I am hoping…….
I would hope you would support who we are. Not, who we are not. Coach Norman Dale "Hoosiers"
by dmitchell624 on Nov 11, 2009 11:42 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I do that all the time, it happens when you type fast and don’t proof read. It’s a bad combo.
I wish there was grading of these posts so I’d be forced to slow down and re-read what I write.
This is my favorite website.
by McGeorge on Nov 11, 2009 12:44 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I would get banned if that happened
I would hope you would support who we are. Not, who we are not. Coach Norman Dale "Hoosiers"
by dmitchell624 on Nov 11, 2009 1:42 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
OMFG
Ok I know its been said time and time again….and I have defended your standpoints in the past regardless of my thoughts on them……but Where IS McGeorge?
this realistically positive person I’m reading sounds much more calm and rational than ANY McGeorge I’ve ever seen. Even in some of your best FanPosts, I did not get this huge of a Calm, Patient feeling from your writing.
Congrats on finally giving McD some props, and congrats on finally realizing that Cutler was not what we needed. Regardless of whether Orton is or not.
+1
"I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work."
- Thomas Alva Edison
"Success is not a place at which one arrives, but rather... the spirit with which one undertakes and continues the journey."
- Alex Noble
by DenBronx on Nov 11, 2009 9:11 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
lol, I think someone stole the account. Either way, I like it.
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
by kentuckybronco on Nov 11, 2009 9:13 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Legwold
His article “Time for a QB Switch” is right on. A refreshingly logical approach.
by Endzone on Nov 11, 2009 10:03 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
yup. Great read. Here is somebody who understands the interconnectedness of the team
"Take what you can. Give nothing back!"
by Colorado_Kitten on Nov 11, 2009 12:24 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
And so we see one more article about the lack of a deep passing game . . .
I am one who has been calling for at least a couple shots downfield during a game. In fact, I would have done that the first play of the game against the Steelers.
But that is not what has caused the short-to-medium game to stall. What has done that is the lack of a running game. Let’s go back to the zone blocking scheme. Put Hillis in. Make a switch at left guard. Anything! But if the Broncos don’t get a running game going, it’ll become wait until next year . . .
BILLY THOMPSON GOT SHAFTED!!
by AZDynamics on Nov 11, 2009 10:04 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
I like the idea, AZ
At this point in the season, absolutely no one would expect a play action, boot, deep pass from the Broncos on the first play from scrimmage! We need to get ahold of McD… ;)
DocBear and I were having this discussion in Ted’s post. I am also one of those folks who believe in taking a few shots downfield, sprinkled throughout a game. Even though you may not be an offense best-suited for this, it should at the very least make the opposing team back off a smidge from the short / intermediate range stuff. DocBear says this is a myth and will be writing something to debunk this (I think).
I don’t claim to be near as knowledgeable about the X’s and O’s of football, so I am awaiting to read his thoughts. But until then, I still espouse to the current popular school of thought…
by tunga77 on Nov 11, 2009 11:48 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
lol
Actually, I wrote a pretty extensive discussion of that myth and a few others in the article on the West Coast Offense. plug broncobear and West Coast into the search function in the upper right hand corner of this page and you can find it.
But what a lot of it comes down to is that statistically, the Broncos have been about average in their long-ball attempts. As fans, we expect that to be more attempts, but fans sometimes miss that the coverage really does dictate where you go with the ball. Secondly – if the line breaks down in 2.5 seconds (about average) and you want to develop a play that takes 3,0 to 3.5, you’re in for a world of hurt. There is no advantage to that – period.
Personally, I like using the 2TE/2RB max protect to maintain the pocket (with one TE and/or 1 RB chipping to create extra receivers) but that doesn’t mean that you would necessarily throw long. Even in that situation and even if you called a long pass, you can only throw to where you have an opening. I read one member yesterday claiming that you should call a long pass and if the receiver is covered, checkdown. I agree – but that’s what Orton has done on quite a few plays, and many fans are still reaming him.
Despite the fans feelings – longer pass attempts are being called. Checkdowns, due to coverage and lack of protection are necessary. You just cannot find any benefit to calling or running extra long passes without realizing that protection and separation are necessary to them becoming completions. Coverage also plays a huge role, and sometimes our preferences seem to get in the way of our understanding of the game.
Moreno/Buckhalter in '09
by Emmett Smith on Nov 11, 2009 12:07 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Ah, I thought you said you were gonna write somethign new
I’ll go look up that older article. I sometimes am busy with work (fortunately not the last week or so) so I’m prone to miss an articles here and there. Plus, there is an insane amount of material on this site, it’s impossible to keep up!! God, you guys are so inconsiderate!!!!
(kidding)
One quick thing though, both McG and I watched some highlights and feel that Orton’s protection was not as atrocious as some are saying. There were a decent amount of plays where he had 3+ seconds before the pocket started breaking down. And I have a pseudo-hypothetical situation above… take a read and let me know your thoughts if you get a sec.
Finally, what’s the best resource for us fans to “watch tape”?? Do people just do DVR? Or is there anything available on the web (beyond highlights on nfl/espn.com)?
by tunga77 on Nov 11, 2009 12:18 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Great question!
I know that it’s 40 or 50 bucks, but the investment into NFL Rewind is the best money I’ve spent. Go to nfl.com and sign up – you’ll love it. Full games, no commercials, back up a play as often as you want, slo-mo, the whole deal. You can see a lot of the ’why’s’ of the game right away.
I read the blurb above. You’ve really only missed two things on it, and I don’t mean that in any negative way (How else does one learn?):
First – you can’t assume that you’ll have that kind of time. You really do, as I noted, have to get the ball off faster against the kind of pass rush that the Steelers employ. To see that on some plays our guys did better than average in hindsight benefits you not at all.
Second – please keep in mind that statistically, we throw deep about the same as the average NFL team. However – you don’t throw it into coverage. It’s a low-benefit, high risk maneuver that clashes with our entire offensive strategy. Orton checks down when he sees the wrong coverage. When he does, fans argue that he ‘should’ have gone deep. They just don’t see, on the TV view, whats going on down field and it leads to misunderstandings
Keep the Q’s coming!
Moreno/Buckhalter in '09
by Emmett Smith on Nov 11, 2009 12:43 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
All these comments about the long ball
It looked to me that Denver’s first play action play (it was one of their first plays on offense) was set up to go down field and Orton checked down. I might be wrong and I have not re-watched the game, but that is my recollection.
by Quietone on Nov 11, 2009 2:13 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
You are right
Marshall was covered well on the play.
by JeffG on Nov 11, 2009 7:00 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks NYC
I shouldn’t be surprised to see Legwold ripping Orton and saying he is going to be like Cutler down the stretch. Hey Legwold, can you wait til we play the second half of the season first. I am willing to bet he was like many others and thought we would be worse than 6-2 right now. Sure we got dominated in two straight games and our offense need to play better, but these teams were in the AFCCG last season.
2009 NBA Champions L.A Lakers
2009 NBA Finals MVP Kobe Bryant
by weazel on Nov 11, 2009 10:18 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
I didn't read it that way...
To me, Legwold’s point was that the issues that hurt the Broncos the past two games (protection, lack of running game) would not have been ameliorated by a big-armed QB. In other words, Legwold thinks Cutler wouldn’t have done any better in the same shoes…
formerly known around these parts as nycbroncosfan
by Douglas A. Lee on Nov 11, 2009 10:24 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I see what you are saying.
I just think we need to let Orton play a full season at least. You can also look at Cutler in Chicago because weren’t they supposed to have a good defense and now they are 4-4.
Protection and a running game are a QBs best friends. We got better protection against PIT than BAL, however our running game needs to show up. Let’s get that back against WAS.
2009 NBA Champions L.A Lakers
2009 NBA Finals MVP Kobe Bryant
by weazel on Nov 11, 2009 10:48 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
meant to say "were" supposed to have a good defense.
2009 NBA Champions L.A Lakers
2009 NBA Finals MVP Kobe Bryant
by weazel on Nov 11, 2009 10:49 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
scratch that, I said it right. Man I need an edit button on here.
2009 NBA Champions L.A Lakers
2009 NBA Finals MVP Kobe Bryant
by weazel on Nov 11, 2009 10:50 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Legwold part II
Exactly. Legwold is NOT blaming Orton but rather the running game woes.
by Endzone on Nov 11, 2009 11:03 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Yup - I think he's actually defending Orton against the calls for Simms or TB to start
“The issue with the Broncos offense is not that it can’t throw — plenty of teams are making a living on short-to-intermediate throws in this catch-and-run era — it’s that the Broncos can’t run well enough, leading to defenses loading up and going after Orton because they don’t fear anything bad happening if they take chances in the rush.”
"Take what you can. Give nothing back!"
by Colorado_Kitten on Nov 11, 2009 12:23 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Kyle Orton, Brian Dawkins and Coach McDaniels will address the press at approx 11:10 a.m. MST.
by Calibroncoboy on Nov 11, 2009 10:50 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
I just love listening to Dawkins being interviewed.
2009 NBA Champions L.A Lakers
2009 NBA Finals MVP Kobe Bryant
by weazel on Nov 11, 2009 12:06 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Woody Paige says it's time for Simms
http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_13759252
And Woody is never, ever wrong…
by JeffG on Nov 11, 2009 11:03 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
WOW
How on earth did I miss that one? Thanks, Jeff. I’ll add it above…
formerly known around these parts as nycbroncosfan
by Douglas A. Lee on Nov 11, 2009 11:05 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Don't miss the comments
Denver fans are, frankly, morons.
by JeffG on Nov 11, 2009 11:21 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for missing it, Doug.
I mean, really. Who needs it?
by Chibronx on Nov 11, 2009 12:59 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
Plus whatever
Very valid point
Moreno/Buckhalter in '09
by Emmett Smith on Nov 11, 2009 1:38 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
LMAO Never, ever
"I am not one of those who think that coming in second or third is winning." -- Robert F. Kennedy
by Ted Bartlett on Nov 11, 2009 11:23 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I missed it too
and you are right, Woody is never wrong ;-)
I would hope you would support who we are. Not, who we are not. Coach Norman Dale "Hoosiers"
by dmitchell624 on Nov 11, 2009 11:41 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for your retort, JeffG!
Not that those morons will actually listen to you…
"Take what you can. Give nothing back!"
by Colorado_Kitten on Nov 11, 2009 12:32 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Lord, what a dim article
Woody needs to lay off the booze before lunch.
Moreno/Buckhalter in '09
by Emmett Smith on Nov 11, 2009 12:09 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
lmao
Nice straw man there Woody. That’s my new nickname for Paige: Scarecrow or Straw Man, I like both.
Jason
The Hanging Curve
by poorboywilly on Nov 11, 2009 12:36 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Hey, if Woody wants to put Jack Daniels in his cheerios instead of milk, that's his choice.
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
by kentuckybronco on Nov 11, 2009 2:58 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Jack ...McDaniels???
k nvm that doens’t work
by RockyMountainHigh on Nov 11, 2009 3:13 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
He could get endorsement deals!!!!
We’re always looking for ways to earn coach some more coin.
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
by kentuckybronco on Nov 11, 2009 3:53 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I’ve seen Woody on TV and my guess is he drinks Peach Apricot wine, not Jack Daniels
This is my favorite website.
by McGeorge on Nov 11, 2009 3:14 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
lol
harsh man. But you’re not wrong :-P
"Take what you can. Give nothing back!"
by Colorado_Kitten on Nov 11, 2009 4:16 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Cosmos
Character may be manifested in the great moments but it is made in the small ones -- Philip Brooks
by KaptainKirk on Nov 12, 2009 12:50 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
He’s diabetic, so he probably doesn’t drink much.
by Chibronx on Nov 11, 2009 3:50 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 3:40 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
Strange... I was hoping for this after the game...
But then when it happens, I get all sad for him… =/
by tunga77 on Nov 11, 2009 3:48 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah...I know the feeling
Glad it happened, because there is no doubt it needed to happen like two games ago, but I still feel bad for the guy.
"Take what you can. Give nothing back!"
by Colorado_Kitten on Nov 11, 2009 4:17 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
yea, you'd like to see good players go out on the top of his game
Not slowly decline and deteriorate to the point where they are benched.
God, that Elway guy really spoiled us in so many different ways. What a jerk…
by tunga77 on Nov 12, 2009 9:49 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Hamilton = Useless
I am sure he’s a nice guy and his parents love him. But on the OL he’s been dead weight overall this year.
Don't argue with fools. It's how they reproduce.
by TheMastermind on Nov 11, 2009 4:09 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
LoL... harsh
But I am thinking of his overall contributions and years of service to the team. He’s been a good player for us overall and that’s why I’m a bit sad to see him benched. Agreed though, it is for the better (at least we think it is at the moment).
by tunga77 on Nov 12, 2009 9:50 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
All this tells me is...
that we won’t be doing much zone blocking in the run game.
On the positive side, Hochstein has 15lbs on Hamilton — so maybe he’s better suited for pass protection.
by JeffG on Nov 11, 2009 4:19 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
RE: Steeler fans at Mile High
I thought this was really good to see in Klis mailbag:
There are buy-back ticket websites and ticket brokers out there. There is Craigslist and eBay. There are scalpers. The Broncos monitor websites and are aware of ticket holders who repeatedly resell their tickets. Those people receive an occasional letter from the Broncos encouraging them, but not threatening them, to resell their seats to Broncos fans.
by tunga77 on Nov 11, 2009 3:49 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
Paige is a fool.
I’ve thought this for a long time but after reading that column about Simms, you’ll never talk me out of it. He sounds like your average bonehead water cooler quarterback, not a guy who knows anything about football.
Don't argue with fools. It's how they reproduce.
by TheMastermind on Nov 11, 2009 4:11 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
He's still just sore that McDaniels insinuated that the media didn't know what they were talking about
…and were less educated. AND not as good-looking (which McDaniels didn’t say – but as grumpy as Paige is toward him, that must have been how he took it)
"Take what you can. Give nothing back!"
by Colorado_Kitten on Nov 11, 2009 4:27 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
i rec'd this whole thread first thing this morning
but i wish i could rec it again, and rather than thank everyone who took part individually, either for their replies or just their insights, i bought you all a beer instead.
help yourself, they’re in the fridge ! (oh and i even splurged and got the good stuff from new zealand tonight)
by Jenna Talia on Nov 11, 2009 5:22 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
Tease!
I would hope you would support who we are. Not, who we are not. Coach Norman Dale "Hoosiers"
by dmitchell624 on Nov 11, 2009 5:29 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
But it is an awesome thread!
I would hope you would support who we are. Not, who we are not. Coach Norman Dale "Hoosiers"
by dmitchell624 on Nov 11, 2009 5:29 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
i so wanted to make that one comment of yours (the one with all the recs) green
and i said as much, but it got lost in translation i think
by Jenna Talia on Nov 11, 2009 5:30 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Hey! You're right!
There is a beer in my fridge. Thanks!!
Jason
The Hanging Curve
by poorboywilly on Nov 11, 2009 8:29 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
My friends and I had our 2nd flag football "minicamp" last night
It was tons of fun… but the best part was grabbing a beer at a local pub afterwards. I had a new Belgium-style wheat beer from … get this … Anheiser Busch, called Shock Top. It was surprisingly good… very refreshing and has a nice citrus hint to it.
Sorry… off topic, but next to talking about football, beer would be a close second. ;)
What’s the New Zealand beer that you were referring to?
by tunga77 on Nov 12, 2009 9:55 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Mile High Report
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Getting Social With MHR
Web Stuff
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
